Tag Archives: Indian

Indian Court Rejects M.J. Akbar’s Defamation Claim in #MeToo Case

NEW DELHI — A court in New Delhi on Wednesday acquitted an Indian journalist of defamation after she accused M.J. Akbar, a prominent former government minister and newspaper editor, of sexual harassment, in a dispute widely seen as a barometer of the country’s fledgling #MeToo movement.

Mr. Akbar had accused the journalist, Priya Ramani, of criminal defamation after she made her allegations. But the court found that Mr. Akbar failed to prove his case, saying that Ms. Ramani’s claims were in the interest of preventing sexual harassment in the workplace.

The court said in its order that the “right of reputation can’t be protected at the cost of right to dignity.”

Mr. Akbar has the opportunity to appeal.

Had Ms. Ramani been found guilty of defamation, she could have been imprisoned for up to two years, fined or both. Under Indian law, individuals can make a criminal defamation claim in the courts, though the legal standard is higher than for civil defamation cases.

Even though Ms. Ramani was acquitted, experts say the defamation suit could still have a chilling effect among women seeking to come forward to complain of harassment and violence at the hands of powerful men. Mr. Akbar, a member of India’s Parliament, mustered a team of nearly 100 lawyers to press his defamation claim against Ms. Ramani.

Mr. Akbar, who founded and edited several newspapers and magazines before switching to politics, has been the most prominent figure in Indian public life to face wide accusations of sexual harassment amid the rise of the #MeToo movement. He is a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, led by Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister, and was part of the team that helped bring Mr. Modi to power in India’s 2014 election.

He resigned as minister of state for external affairs in 2018 after Ms. Ramani’s allegations of sexual harassment prompted 20 other women to sign a letter making similar accusations. Mr. Akbar has denied all of the women’s allegations.

Ms. Ramani’s accusations focused on Mr. Akbar’s tenure at The Asian Age, the newspaper he started in the early 1990s.

In October 2017, she wrote an article for Vogue India in which she described an uncomfortable hotel room encounter with a senior editor during a job interview more than 20 years earlier. She described him as a legend in the news industry but did not include his name.

A year later, in October 2018, as the #MeToo movement swept Indian social media, with Bollywood stars and journalists speaking out, Ms. Ramani tweeted a link to the Vogue story, this time identifying Mr. Akbar, then a junior foreign minister in Mr. Modi’s cabinet.

“Lots of women have worse stories about this predator,” she wrote. “Maybe they’ll share.”

Within days, nearly a dozen journalists came forward with allegations ranging from harassment to rape by Mr. Akbar during his tenure as a senior editor with various Indian publications. By the end of the month, 21 female journalists had published their allegations. They said Mr. Akbar had used his position as a senior editor to harass and intimidate them, mostly young women starting their careers in journalism.

Mr. Akbar resigned amid the allegations but filed a defamation suit against Ms. Ramani the following day. Ms. Ramani has since deactivated her Twitter account. Mr. Akbar has said the deactivation amounted to evidence tampering.

In a court hearing in September, Ms. Ramani said her allegations did not amount to defamation because they were true and in the public interest.

Mr. Akbar did not respond to repeated requests for comment on Wednesday. Ms. Ramani said that she could not discuss the case until a verdict had been reached.

“I spoke because women before me spoke up,” she said at a literature festival in 2019. “I spoke so people after me can speak up.”

Read original article here

Indian farmers protest new agriculture laws with blockades

Tens of thousands of farmers blockaded main roads across India on Saturday in a continuation of a months-long protest movement against new agricultural policies they say will empower corporations and devastate them financially.

The continued demonstrations indicate that protest energy remains strong, as the government and farmers remain locked in a stalemate after several rounds of talks between them failed to produce any major breakthroughs.

Protestors used tractors, trucks, tents, and boulders to block roads during a three-hour “chakka jam,” or road blockade, across the country, according to Reuters.

Blockades were set up at over 10,000 sites across India on Saturday, according to Avik Saha, a secretary of the All India Kisan Sangharsh Coordination Committee, a federation of farmer groups.

“We will keep fighting till our last breath,” Jhajjan Singh, an 80-year-old farmer at a protest site in Ghazipur, told the Guardian. He said that India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, “should know that either he will remain or we will.”

Tens of thousands of police were deployed across the country to deal with the protests. While the farmer demonstrations have been largely peaceful, on January 26, a group of protesters peeled off from a demonstration route and fought with police officers in Delhi, an incident which resulted in hundreds of injuries and the death of a protester.

Farmer leaders condemned the violence, but security has ramped up since then. According to the Guardian, police have added iron spikes and steel barricades around protest sites to prevent farmers from entering the capital.

Why the protesters are mobilizing

Protesters have been mobilizing against three agriculture reform laws passed by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in September; together, the laws aim to deregulate India’s agricultural industry.

As Vox’s Jariel Arvin explained in December, while the government says this is necessary to modernize the economy, protesters argue that it will only intensify their economic precarity:

Under the new policies, farmers will now sell goods and make contracts with independent buyers outside of government-sanctioned marketplaces, which have long served as the primary locations for farmers to do business. Modi and members of his party believe these reforms will help India modernize and improve its farming industry, which will mean greater freedom and prosperity for farmers.

But the protesting farmers aren’t convinced. Although the government has said it will not drop minimum support prices for essential crops like grain, which the Indian government has set and guaranteed for decades, the farmers are concerned they will disappear. Without them, the farmers believe they will be at the mercy of large corporations that will pay extremely low prices for essential crops, plunging them into debt and financial ruin.

“Farmers have so much passion because they know that these three laws are like death warrants for them,” Abhimanyu Kohar, coordinator of the National Farmer’s Alliance, a federation of more than 180 nonpolitical farm organizations across India, told me in an interview. “Our farmers are doing this movement for our future, for our very survival.”

The protests have garnered sustained international attention, in part because of their sheer size. As Reuters notes, although farming accounts for only about 15 parent of India’s GDP, about 50 percent of the country’s workers are farmers — and hundreds of millions of farmers have taken part in street demonstrations and strikes since last fall.

Farmers have had a powerful voice in Indian politics — and don’t want to lose it

Experts say that the government’s attempt to change farming policy has touched a third rail in Indian politics, revealing tensions created by modernization while threatening to unravel market norms for farmers that have been in place for decades.

Since the 1970s, an elaborate system of agricultural subsidies and price guarantees, organized through a system of marketplaces known as mandis, has been a central feature of agricultural policy in India, and, as Arvin noted, have essentially helped provide farmers with a kind of safety net.

Aditya Dasgupta, an assistant professor of political science at the University of California, Merced specializing in the politics of India, says those policies are the product of large-scale mobilization by farmers, agrarian unions, movements, and parties which became politically powerful during the Green Revolution, the country’s enormous leap in agricultural productivity, which took place in the 1970s and ’80s.

“The farmers’ protests today hark back to that tradition of protest and display of agrarian power, but the context is very different,” Dasgupta told me. “India is urbanizing, agriculture accounts for a shrinking share of GDP, and the main source of political-economic support for the ruling BJP party comes from urban big business.”

“So, in a sense, this is not just a conflict about specific policies, but also a larger flashpoint about the sectoral basis of political power, and whether or not farmers remain a politically powerful interest group as India urbanizes,” he said.

While it’s unclear what kind of compromise or concession might dial down tensions regarding the current reforms, experts like Dasgupta point out that the underlying dynamics that gave rise to them — questions over who should hold power in India’s evolving economy — are likely to remain in the long term.

Read original article here

Washing machines and libraries: What life is like in Indian farmers’ protest camps

In November, farmers infuriated by new agricultural reforms drove in tractor conveys from around India to set up multiple blockades at the city’s borders.

This camp at Ghazipur on the border between Delhi and the neighboring state of Uttar Pradesh is one of three major temporary settlements on the outskirts of the capital. Almost everyone here is from neighboring Uttar Pradesh, but farmers at other camps have come from states including Haryana and Punjab — the latter is known as the “bread basket of India” due to its large food production industry.

Around 10,000 people — mainly men, both young and old — are stationed at Ghazipur alone, according to camp leaders, although the number fluctuates from day-to-day as farmers split their time between their homes and the camp. Many have family members minding their farms, allowing them to stay in the capital for long stretches.

The farmers face challenges — the cold winter temperatures, clashes with police and security forces, and restrictions on their internet access, among others. Despite that, farmers say they have no plans to leave until the government overturns the laws.

A makeshift town

Here at Ghazipur, the camp hums along like a well-oiled machine.

By night, the farmers who choose to stay asleep in brightly colored tents pitched on the road, or on mattresses underneath their tractors (and in hundreds of vans and trucks). By day, many help run the camp.

All their basic needs are catered for. There are portable toilets — although the stench makes it unpleasant to get too close. There’s also a supply store which has plastic crates of shampoo sachets and tissues — these supplies, like all those in the camp, were donated either by farmers or supporters of the farmers’ cause.

Water is brought in from nearby civic stations. Jagjeet Singh, a 26-year-old from Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, uses his tractor to bring back 4,000 liter (1,057 gallon) tanks of water each day (he brings in about 10 to 12 such tanks a day) that can be used for drinking, bathing, and cleaning. Some men stand by the tank washing the grimy black mud from the wet road off their shoes and legs.

Meals are cooked over a small gas fire in a cast iron pan held up by fire-blackened bricks, and provided for free from inside of a tent that’s been constructed from bamboo poles and plastic. A farmer wearing blue medical gloves scoops pakora — a kind of spiced fritter — into bowls for farmers who are wrapped in scarves, jackets and hats to brave against Delhi’s winter chill. Nearby, cauliflower and potatoes burst out of burlap sacks.

Kuldeep Singh, a 36-year-old farmer, helps to prepare the meals. He came here over 60 days ago. Like many others, his family are helping cover his work back home, although he goes back and forth between the camp and his farm.

“Be it the work back home or the camp, both are equally important,” he said.

Himanshi Rana, a 20-year-old volunteer operating the camp’s makeshift medical center, has also been here for more than two months. She helps treat people’s diseases, and tended to farmers who were hit by tear gas during violent demonstrations on January 26 — India’s Republic Day. On that day, thousands of protesters stormed New Delhi’s historic Red Fort as police used tear gas and batons against the demonstrators. One protester died, although protesters and police disagree over the cause of death.

“My father is a farmer, I am a farmer’s daughter. Me being here is inevitable,” she said. “We are here to serve the people … we will stay put until the government agrees to the demands.”

One thing the protesters are not asking for are face masks. Despite India reporting the most coronavirus cases of any country in the world bar the United States, no farmers at Ghazipur are wearing face coverings.

Farmers at Ghazipur say they’re not worried about coronavirus — according to Rana, they believe that they have strong immunity from their physical labor, meaning they’re not scared of catching it.

What life is like in the camps

The mood of the camp is joyful, more like a festival than a demonstration.

The camp itself is a kind of protest — the farmers are blocking the road to help bring awareness to their cause. It’s also the base for demonstrations, including the rally that turned violent on Republic Day.

For many, there are hours of downtime when they’re not helping run the camp or holding demonstrations. A group of men sit in a circle smoking hookah pipes, while others play cards on a blanket. More than a dozen men sit or stand on a red tractor, playing a pro-farmer song from the speakers as they ride through the camp. There’s a library for the youngsters that includes books on revolutions in multiple languages.

Every now and again, a group breaks into a chant. “We’ll be here until the government gives in!”

As the water collector Jagjeet Singh puts it: “I don’t feel like I am away from home.”

And there are people besides the protesters, too. Young children dash through the camp, trying to scavenge things to sell elsewhere. Vendors from nearby villages spread out pro-farmer badges on blankets and curious onlookers from nearby areas come to see what’s going on.

But all this belies the serious reason why they’re there — that for many this is a matter of life or death.

Farmers say the new laws aimed at bringing more market freedom to the industry will make it easier for corporations to exploit agricultural workers — and leave them struggling to meet the minimum price that they were guaranteed for certain crops under the previous rules.

And while the mood within the camp is calm and relaxed, there’s a constant reminder that not everyone supports the farmers’ fight.

Large barricades erected by the police and topped with barbed wire stand a few hundred meters from the hubbub of camp life, hemming the farmers in and keeping them from encroaching any closer to the center of Delhi. Security forces line the sides of the camp, keeping watch for any trouble, although they have not tried to clear the camp — likely because it would be politically unpopular.

The farmers say the barricades make them seem like outsiders — like they are foreigners in their own land who don’t belong here.

“The government is treating us like we are Chinese, sitting on the other side of the fence,” Kuldeep Singh said, referring to the tense border dispute currently taking place between India and China in the Himalayas.

Difficulty for protesters

As the months have worn on, protesting has become harder.

The winter temperatures have dropped to below 10 degrees Celsius (50 degrees Farenheit) at night. And tensions have ramped up during the protests. Last week, internet access was blocked in several districts of a state bordering India’s capital following violent clashes between police and farmers there protesting the controversial agricultural reforms.

The government has been criticized not only for the controversial farm laws themselves, but also how it has handled the demonstrations. At the end of January, India’s main opposition party, the Congress Party, and 15 other opposition parties, said Prime Minister Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) party have been “arrogant, adamant and undemocratic in their response.”

“(Hundreds and thousands) of farmers have been … braving biting cold and heavy rain for the last 64 days for their rights and justice,” they wrote in a joint statement. “The government remains unmoved and has responded with water cannons, tear gas and lathi charges. Every effort has been made to discredit a legitimate mass movement through government sponsored disinformation campaign.”

According to Samyukta Kisan Morcha, the umbrella body of protesting farmers, at least 147 farmers have died during the course of the monthslong protests from a range of causes, including suicide, road accidents and exposure to cold weather. Authorities have not given an official figure on protester deaths.

Nevertheless, farmers are continuing to arrive at the camps, Samyukta Kisan Morcha said earlier this week.

“Typically these village groups work against each other but this time they have all united for the collective fight,” said Paramjeet Singh Katyal, a spokesperson for Samyukta Kisan Morcha.

What happens next

Protests are fairly common in India, the world’s largest democracy. And it’s not the first time that large protests have rocked the country — in 2019, a controversial citizenship law that excludes Muslims prompted mass demonstrations.

But these protests are a particular challenge for Modi.

Agriculture is the primary source of livelihood for 58% of India’s 1.3 billion population, making farmers the biggest voter block in the country. Angering the farmers could lose Modi a significant chunk of votes at the next general election in 2024. Modi and his government continue to insist that they are supporting farmers, and called the new laws as a “watershed moment” which will ensure a complete transformation of the agriculture sector. Besides calling the move long overdue, Modi has not said why he opted to introduce these measures during the pandemic, which has caused India to suffer its first recession in decades.

In a statement issued this week, the Indian government said that the protests “must be seen in the context of India’s democratic ethos and polity, and the ongoing efforts of the government and the concerned farmer groups to resolve the impasse,” and that certain measures, such as the temporary internet block, were “undertaken to prevent further violence.”

The camps have also created a headache for nearby commuters and trucks bringing food into Delhi — people who would have traveled on the expressway at Ghazipur are forced to take different routes, sometimes doubling their travel time.

But the farmers are showing no interest in backing down.

Rounds of talks have failed to make any headway. Although the Supreme Court put three contentious farm orders on hold last month and ordered the formation of a four-member mediation committee to help the parties negotiate, farmers’ leaders have rejected any court-appointed mediation committee.

Last month, central government offered to suspend the laws for 1.5 years — but to farmers, all of this is not far enough.

Sanjit Baliyan, 25, has been at the camp for over a month, working at the supply tent. He points out that farmers have done a lot for Modi’s government, only for Modi to introduce a law that removes any minimum prices for their stocks.

“We haven’t spoken against the government for last seven years. But, if we are at receiving end, we will have to speak,” he said.

Some, like 50-year-old farmer Babu Ram, want the protests to end. “A prolonged protest is neither good for the farmers nor for the government. The protest, if it’s stretched, will create a ruckus.”

But he added: “This protest will only end once the government agrees to our demands … we have to stay here till the end.”

While Kuldeep Singh agrees that there’s hardship — farmers’ households have cut their own consumption to contribute to the protest camps — he says farmers will only leave once the laws are repealed. “We will sit here for the next three years. We will sit till the elections, till the laws are scrapped.”

Jouranlist Rishabh Pratap and Esha Mitra contributed to this story from New Delhi.



Read original article here

Indian comedian jailed for allegedly insulting Hindus

For more than a month, Munawar Faruqui, a tousled-haired, 30-year-old comic, has languished in jail for a joke he didn’t tell.

Faruqui was beginning to make his name in the crowded ranks of India’s up-and-coming stand-up comedians. More than half a million people subscribed to his YouTube channel, where his performances feature an edgy mix of social and political commentary, one-liners and takedowns of religious fundamentalism delivered in rapid-fire Hindi.

The trouble started on New Year’s Day, when Faruqui took the microphone at a cafe in the central city of Indore. Just as he was beginning his set, a man wearing a white shirt and unzipped vest walked onstage and began harassing the comedian, accusing him of insulting Hinduism.

The crowd cheered on Faruqui, who is Muslim, and burst into applause when the man left. Minutes later, Faruqui and four other comedians and event organizers were arrested by police for allegedly making “indecent” and “vulgar” remarks.

Denied bail three times by a state court, Faruqui has become a prominent example of what critics say is an escalating crackdown against free speech in Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s India.

A growing number of entertainers, activists, lawyers and academics who have spoken against Modi’s Hindu nationalist government have been arrested, charged with sedition and other serious crimes, or viciously attacked on social media.

In recent days, India has filed criminal charges against journalists who covered a Jan. 26 protest by farmers against proposed agricultural laws. It ordered Twitter to block hundreds of accounts critical of the prime minister and threatened the company’s employees with jail time if they didn’t comply. Last month, the producers of a fictional Amazon Prime Video series called “Tandav” apologized after politicians from Modi’s party claimed the show had insulted Hindus.

Farmers protest against new agricultural laws on the outskirts of New Delhi.

(Manish Swarup / Associated Press)

Faruqui’s friends say he was targeted in part because of his faith. The allegations have jeopardized the promising career of a small-town striver whose only offense, they argue, was poking fun at the powerful establishment in a country that increasingly seems to lack a sense of humor.

Muslims, who make up about 14% of the population, are the largest religious minority in overwhelmingly Hindu India. Since Modi came to power in 2014 on a Hindu nationalist wave, members of his Bharatiya Janata Party and allied groups have promoted laws that have marginalized Muslims and subjected many to vigilante violence.

Faruqui’s case shows that in India, the world’s most populous democracy, “the judiciary sometimes looks at the accused, not the accusation,” said Sanjay Hegde, a prominent lawyer who is not involved in the case.

The man who accosted him onstage, Eklavya Gaur, is the son of a local leader associated with the ruling BJP. Gaur is the leader of a group called the Hind Rakshak Sangathan, one of many hard-line Hindu organizations that have risen to prominence under Modi’s government and claim to defend the faith.

A video shot by an audience member shows Gaur addressing the crowd, saying: “This is Munawar Faruqui. He makes fun of our gods and goddesses and you pay to watch his shows. Don’t you have any shame?”

“Sir,” Faruqui responded calmly, “I don’t target anyone. I have made jokes about Islam. I have also made jokes about triple talaq” — a practice, until recently legal in India, by which a Muslim man could divorce his wife merely by uttering (or texting) the word three times.

Gaur said he didn’t care; he accused Faruqui of mocking Ram, a Hindu god, which he found unacceptable. Gaur appeared to be referring to a joke, seen in a clip online, about a classic Bollywood love song in which a woman invokes Ram to celebrate her husband returning home.

Faruqui joked in English: “Ram-ji doesn’t give a — about your husband.”

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling party has cracked down on critics, including entertainers and journalists.

(Manish Swarup / Associated Press)

In a complaint filed with Indore police, Gaur accused Faruqui of “deliberately intending to outrage religious feelings,” a criminal offense punishable by up to four years in prison.

Faruqui’s lawyer, Anshuman Srivastava, said Faruqui did not perform that joke in Indore, and that Gaur has alleged only that he “overheard” him practicing the line.

“The police registered the complaint without conducting a preliminary investigation,” Srivastava said. “It appears this is happening under political pressure.”

With barbed, well-timed punchlines, Faruqui did tread on sensitive topics during his brief time on stage. He opened with a joke about his home state. “I was born and brought up in Gujarat,” he told the crowd. After a pause, he added, “Survived in Gujarat.”

The crowd laughed, but the joke was dark: Gujarat, a prosperous state in western India, was led by Modi for more than a decade before he became prime minister. Under his watch, in 2002, religious riots killed more than 1,000 people, most of them Muslims.

For years, Modi was dogged by allegations that he did not take action to stop the bloodletting. Although he has never been convicted of wrongdoing, the riots remain a blot on the prime minister’s career. Many Muslims in Gujarat continue to associate Modi and the BJP with religious persecution.

“I think I survived,” Faruqui continued, “because I believe [the] government is not good in completing their targets.”

Low whistles this time, then laughter and applause.

A few minutes later, he and the others were arrested.

Indians participate in a candlelight vigil in 2012 to mark the 10th anniversary of the Gujarat religious riots.

(Ajit Solanki / Associated Press)

Faruqui, who hails from the city of Junagarh, lost his mother at a young age and moved to Mumbai as a teenager to support his family. His first job was at a utensil shop, where he earned about $1 a day for a 13-hour shift. At the time, he couldn’t speak Hindi or English.

He later found work at a graphic design company, where he discovered he was gifted at coming up with witty one-liners for posters. It was around 2017, when a surge in mobile internet access and the arrival of international streaming platforms like Netflix were driving a boom in Indian stand-up comedy, so he decided to try telling jokes before an audience.

Around that time, he met another aspiring comic, Saad Shaikh, at a show where they were the only Muslims performing. The bearded Shaikh said many Indians didn’t immediately peg Faruqui, whose wispy stubble and baggy T-shirts give him the look of a distracted college student, as a practicing Muslim.

Their difference in appearance may help explain their approaches to comedy: Shaikh said he tends to avoid political humor, whereas Faruqui took more risks with his material.

“It is very easy for a Muslim comedian to be targeted,” Shaikh said.

Aditi Mittal, a Mumbai-based stand-up comic, said political comedy has become increasingly fraught under Modi’s government. Since 2014, Mittal said, even joking about rising gas prices earned howls of protest from the prime minister’s partisans.

“You never know what may lead to a controversy, and that is always at the back of my mind when I write jokes,” she said. “But it is our responsibility to speak up.”

Last summer, comedian Agrima Joshua received rape and death threats for telling jokes allegedly insulting Shivaji, the 17th century warrior king revered by Hindu nationalists in Maharashtra state, which includes Mumbai.

Comedian Kunal Kamra is facing contempt charges in India’s Supreme Court for tweets criticizing the court after it granted bail to pro-BJP news anchor Arnab Goswami in a case involving the 2018 deaths of an interior designer and the designer’s mother.

Indian news anchor Arnab Goswami sits inside a police vehicle after his arrest in Mumbai in November on charges of abetment of suicide.

(Associated Press)

Kamra refused to apologize and issued a passionate statement in which he wrote: “Should powerful people and institutions continue to show an inability to tolerate rebuke or criticism, we would be reduced to a country of incarcerated artists and flourishing lapdogs.”

Sanjay Rajoura, a New Delhi-based member of the Aisi Taisi Democracy satirical troupe, said the case against Faruqui is the sign of a “rotten society,” and would dog him even if he were released and cleared of wrongdoing.

“Who will give him shows?” Rajoura said. “Those who own venues will have a fear of backlash. So will the sponsors. It will have an impact on his career.”

Ashutosh Bagri, the police superintendent in Indore, said has pledged a “fair and impartial” investigation. But the court in Madhya Pradesh state has sharply criticized Faruqui, most recently in a hearing Jan. 25, when a judge accused him of taking “undue advantage of others’ religious sentiments and emotions” in his act.

“What is wrong with your mindset?” the judge asked. “How can you do this for the purpose of your business? Such people must not be spared.”

The judge ordered Faruqui back to his cell in Indore, where he has been held incommunicado since the first week of January.

Shaikh said that in the months before the incident in Indore, Faruqui began to realize that many people in India felt the same way as the judge. Last April, social media trolls threatened him over his jokes about Hinduism. A hashtag calling for his arrest briefly trended nationally.

“That shook him,” Shaikh recalled. “He was even questioning his comedy at the time, but we told him to have faith in the judiciary. Looking back, we were probably wrong.”

Special correspondent Parth M.N. reported from Mumbai and Times staff writer Bengali from Singapore.

window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({

appId : '119932621434123',

xfbml : true, version : 'v2.9' }); };

(function(d, s, id){ var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) {return;} js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs); }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Read original article here

Indian court rules that groping without removing clothes is not sexual assault

In a judgment last week, Bombay High Court judge Pushpa Ganediwala found that a 39-year-old man was not guilty of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl as he had not removed her clothes, meaning there was no skin-on-skin contact.

According to court documents, the man brought the child to his house on the pretext of giving her guava in December 2016. While there, he touched her chest and tried to remove her underwear, according to the judgment.

He was found guilty of sexual assault and sentenced to three years in prison in a lower court, but then appealed to the High Court.

In her judgment on January 19, Justice Ganediwala found that his act “would not fall in the definition of ‘sexual assault,'” which carries a minimum three year prison term which can be extended to five years.

“Considering the stringent nature of punishment provided for the offense, in the opinion of this court, stricter proof and serious allegations are required,” she wrote. India’s Protection of Children From Sexual Offenses Act 2012 does not explicitly state that skin-on-skin contact is needed to constitute the crime of sexual assault.

Justice Ganediwala acquitted the accused of sexual assault but convicted him on the lesser charge of molestation and sentenced him to one year in prison.

“It is the basic principle of criminal jurisprudence that the punishment for an offense shall be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime,” she said.

India’s sexual assault problem

Indians took to social media after the Bombay High Court decision was released to question the logic of the court decision, which sets a new precedent. Other high courts and lower courts around the country will now need to follow the Bombay High Court’s decision.

The National Commission for Women said it planned to mount a legal challenge to the judgment, which it said will have a “cascading effect on various provisions involving safety and security of women.”

Karuna Nundy, a lawyer at the Supreme Court of India, the country’s top court, called for judges who passed judgments that were “completely contrary to established law” and basic rights to be retrained.

“Judgments like this contribute to impunity in crimes against girls,” she tweeted.

Ranjana Kumari, the director of non-profit Centre for Social Research, which advocates for women’s rights in India, said the judgment is “shameful, outrageous, shocking and devoid of judicial prudence.”

Sexual assault is huge issue in India, where sexual crimes are often brutal and widespread, but are often poorly dealt with under the country’s justice system. Based on official figures from 2018, the rape of a woman is reported every 16 minutes.
Following a high-profile case in 2012 when a 23-year-old student was raped and murdered on a New Delhi bus, legal reforms and more severe penalties were introduced.

Those included fast track courts to move rape cases through the justice system swiftly, an amended definition of rape to include anal and oral penetration, and the publication of new government guidelines intended to do away with the two-finger test which purportedly assessed whether a woman had sexual intercourse recently.

But high-profile rape cases have continued to hit headlines. Last year, number of cases sparked outrage, including the case of a 13-year-old girl who was raped and found strangled to death in a field, and an 86-year-old woman who was allegedly raped while she waited for the milkman.
Activists have pointed to ongoing issues in the justice system. Under India’s legal system, for instance, sexually abusing a transgender person carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison.

CNN’s Swati Gupta and Manveena Suri contributed reporting.



Read original article here

Indian Farmers March Set for Republic Day

NEW DELHI — As pomp and color of military parades go, India’s Republic Day celebrations rank among the most eye-catching.

But on Tuesday, just as the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi prepared to celebrate the anniversary of the inception of the country’s Constitution with another parade by the armed forces, an unlikely force was preparing to upstage the show.

India’s protesting farmers, who have been camped out at the gates of New Delhi for two months demanding that Mr. Modi repeal laws that would reshape Indian agriculture, were preparing to march into the capital with thousands of tractors.

The show of force, after the central government failed in its frantic efforts to prevent the tractor march, dramatically illustrated how deeply the deadlock with the farmers has embarrassed Mr. Modi. Though he has emerged as India’s most dominant figure after crushing his political opposition, the farmers have been persistently defiant.

Mr. Modi in September rushed through the Parliament three farming laws that he hopes will inject private investment into a sector that has been troubled with inefficiency and a lack of money for decades. But farmers quickly rose up against them, saying the government’s easing of regulations had left them at the mercy of corporate giants that would take over their businesses.

As their protests have grown in size and anger, with tens of thousands of farmers camped out in the cold for two months and dozens of deaths among them, the government has offered to amend some parts of the laws to include their demands. The country’s Supreme Court also intervened, ordering the government to suspend the laws until it reaches a resolution with the farmers.

But the farmers say they will not stop short of a repeal, and they have begun increasing pressure. In addition to their tractor march on Tuesday, they have announced plans to hold a march by foot to the Indian Parliament on Feb. 1, when the country’s new budget will be presented.

Tensions were high leading up to Tuesday, with some officials claiming the protests had been infiltrated by insurgent elements who would resort to violence if the farmers were allowed inside the city. Just days before the tractor march, the farmers’ leaders brought in front of the media a young man they claimed they had arrested on suspicion of a plot to shoot the leaders on Tuesday to disrupt the rally. Neither set of claims could be independently verified.

There was some confusion about the scope and size of the tractor march before it was to begin. Reports in the local media, citing documents from the Delhi police, said the march would begin only after the high-profile Republic Day parade in the heart of New Delhi had culminated. The reports also said the number of tractors and how long they could stay inside the city had been capped.

But farm leaders at a news conference on Monday said there were no limitations on time and number of tractors as long as they stuck to the routes set out by the Delhi police. Maps of the routes suggested a compromise between the farmers and the police that could allow the protesters to enter the city but not get close to sensitive institutions of power.

The leaders said that about 150,000 tractors had gathered at the borders of the capital for the march, that about 3,000 volunteers would try to help the police in keeping order, and that 100 ambulances were on standby.

The farm leaders, both in statements given to the marchers as well as during the news conference, repeatedly appealed for peace as they carried out the tractor march.

“Remember, our aim is not to conquer Delhi, but to win over the hearts of the people of this country,” they said in instructions posted online for marchers, who were told not to carry weapons — “not even sticks” — during the march and to avoid provocative slogans and banners.

“The trademark of this agitation has been that it’s peaceful,” Balbir Singh Rajewal, one of the main leaders of the movement, said. “My request to our farmer brothers, to our youth, is that they keep this movement peaceful. The government is spreading rumors, the agencies have started misguiding people. Beware of it.

“If we remain peaceful, we’ve won. If we turn violent, Modi will win.”

Hari Kumar contributed reporting.

Read original article here

Chinese and Indian Troops Clash at Their Disputed Border

NEW DELHI — Indian and Chinese troops have clashed along their disputed Himalayan border, according to media and military reports on Monday, as Beijing quietly intensifies pressure against its southern neighbor with new incursions into territory claimed by both sides.

Details about the latest skirmish remain foggy, and Indian officials played down the events. Indian media outlets and independent military analysts said that the clash happened several days ago, and that soldiers on both sides were wounded, although no fatalities were reported.

The Indian Army has said only that a “minor face-off” occurred last week in northern Sikkim, a mountainous Indian state bordering China.

The face-off was “resolved by local commanders as per established protocols,” an Indian Army statement read, without explaining how the face-off occurred or whether anyone was injured.

Chinese officials were even more tight-lipped. At a regularly scheduled news conference on Monday, Zhao Lijian, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, emphasized that the two sides were holding military talks. Hu Xijin, the editor of Global Times, a nationalist tabloid controlled by the Communist Party, called the reports “fake news” and said that small frictions occur often.

Though details were scant, reports of a clash show that tensions are still simmering between the two Asian giants, which fought a war in 1962 and have been eyeing each other warily across their unresolved frontier ever since. Tensions burst into the open in June, when troops from both countries engaged in a deadly brawl along the border of the Ladakh region in northern India.

No shots were fired in that battle, stemming from a tacit understanding that neither side along the tense Himalayan border should use firearms. Still, the deaths of more than 20 Indian soldiers and an unknown number of Chinese troops exposed the increasing aggressiveness of both countries, which are governed by nationalist leaders with little political incentive to back down.

As many as 100,000 troops from the Indian and Chinese armies are now facing off across inhospitable mountain passes in subzero temperatures in the Ladakh region alone, military experts estimate.

Since the summer, both sides have tried to ease tensions. But in India, the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi is contending with reports that China is far from done encroaching on disputed borderlands.

The NDTV report of new structures built in the harsh mountainous area is difficult to independently verify. Two Indian government officials in Arunachal said the Chinese had recently built villages in disputed areas along the border in places that used to have just a few remote military posts.

“Where the army had been living, some civilians also started living there,” said D.J. Borah, a senior district official based in that area.

When asked about the new village, officials at the Indian Foreign Ministry referred back to a statement given to NDTV in which the ministry said that it was aware of the recent report and that “China has undertaken such infrastructure construction activity in the past several years.”

Leaders of India’s main opposition party have criticized Mr. Modi for staying silent on the matter. “China is expanding its occupation into Indian territory,” Rahul Gandhi, the leader of the party, Indian National Congress, said on Twitter.

Chinese officials don’t deny that there are new villages in the area. But they say that area is in China.

“China’s normal construction on its own territory is entirely a matter of sovereignty,” Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Minister, said this month.

Local leaders in Arunachal Pradesh interviewed by The New York Times said the Chinese forces have been slowly but steadily cutting away small pieces of Indian territory, much like the strategy China has shown in the South China Sea and along its border with Bhutan. Military analysts call this salami slicing.

“Longju used to be our land,” said Chatung Mra, a bank manager, using the local name for the general area where the Chinese village now stands. “Our forefathers used to live there.”

“We feel very bad but what can we do?” Mr. Mra asked. “We can’t fight them.”

The area in question is in the foothills of the Himalayas and more than 1,500 miles from New Delhi, the capital. Official Indian maps showed that the Longju area lies several miles inside India, said the local leaders who have visited near the disputed area. But China, they said, has effectively controlled it since 1959.

In recent years, they said, China has engaged in a flurry of construction projects along the border and rendered areas that used to be accessible to people on the Indian side now inaccessible.

The Chinese infrastructure campaign, the local leaders said, far outpaced what India has been doing and has been effective in absorbing disputed areas into China.

“Our place used to be up to five or six kilometers beyond Longju,” said Tungpo Mra, a leader of the Mra, a local ethnic group. “Now all that is in China’s control.”

Taro Bamina, the general secretary of an Arunachal youth group, was especially frustrated and helped organize a protest last week that included hundreds of demonstrators in Daporijo, an Arunachal market town.

“This is our motherland,” Mr. Bamina said. “We wanted to tell the government of India. ‘Why didn’t you take care of that?’’’

What local leaders are reporting in Arunachal is similar to what local leaders in Ladakh have reported more than 2,000 miles away. In the past few years, according to Ladakh leaders, China has stepped up construction projects along the frontier with India, which zigs and zags through high mountain passes and has never been marked. The result is that China can move troops — and civilians — to the borderlands much faster than India.

Chinese and Indian military commanders continue to hold talks along the disputed border in the Ladakh region. In the meantime, Ladakhi herders have complained that they have had to chase away Chinese vehicles that brazenly crossed into India.

Sushant Singh, a senior fellow at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi and an Indian Army veteran, said the latest clash in Sikkim, an area where India had expected to have a strategic advantage because it has more troops, suggested that tensions would rise as the ground thaws.

“If you see it in light of everything going on,” Mr. Singh said, “it means that, the coming summer, we are looking at a very tense situation.”

Steven Lee Myers contributed reporting from Seoul, South Korea.



Read original article here

Chinese and Indian troops ‘in new border clash’

Sikkim is one of many areas that have seen India-China disputes. File image

Chinese and Indian troops have reportedly clashed again in a disputed border area, with injuries on both sides, Indian media say.

The incident took place in north Sikkim last Wednesday. India’s army said there had been a “minor” incident that had been “resolved”.

Tensions are high along the world’s longest disputed border. Both sides claim large areas of territory.

At least 20 Indian soldiers died in a skirmish in the Ladakh area last June.

What happened in the latest incident?

It happened at Naku La in north Sikkim, the media reports said. Sikkim is an Indian state sandwiched between Bhutan and Nepal, about 2,500km (1,500 miles) east of the Ladakh area.

A Chinese patrol tried to enter Indian territory and was forced back, the officials said. Some reports said sticks and stones were used, but there were no gunshots.

An Indian army statement played down the incident, saying there “was a minor face-off at Naku La area of North Sikkim on 20 January 2021 and the same was resolved by local commanders as per established protocols”.

One source told the Times of India that both sides brought in reinforcements after a “brawl” but there was no gunfire and the situation was under control.

China’s foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian did not give details of the incident, but said China’s troops were “committed to upholding peace” and urged India to “refrain from actions that might escalate or complicate the situation along the border”.

The editor-in-chief of China’s state-affiliated Global Times tweeted there was “no record of this clash in the patrol log of the Chinese side”.

BBC map

Flashpoints and dialogue

Analysis by Vikas Pandey, BBC News, Delhi

The latest reports about skirmishes show that tensions are still running high. The Indian army statement shows that both nations are still keen on keeping the dialogue route open and don’t want skirmishes to derail the process.

They have conducted several military-level talks to ease tensions but nothing concrete has come of them yet.

And troops are still facing each other at several flashpoints along their contested border.

Some former Indian officers say such exchanges can’t be avoided when the situation is so fluid. But they agree that talks need to continue as both nations would not want a war – not even a limited one.

Why are there border disputes?

A lot of the 3,440km (2,100-mile) border is ill defined. Rivers, lakes and snowcaps mean the line can shift, bringing soldiers face to face at many points, sometimes leading to confrontations.

There was a minor clash last May at Naku La, which is at an altitude of more than 5,000m (16,000ft). One month later a deadly clash erupted in the Galwan Valley in Ladakh. In addition to the Indian deaths, China also reportedly suffered casualties although it made no official comment.

Since the savage hand-to-hand fighting there, in which no shots were fired, the two sides have held de-escalation talks. The ninth round of them took place between military commanders on Sunday in eastern Ladakh but there have been no details of any agreements.

The nuclear-armed neighbours have a lot to lose, with China one of India’s biggest trading partners.

Relations have worsened amid the border face-off. Both have stepped up infrastructure construction along some of the border areas.

India’s government has also banned more than 200 Chinese apps, citing cyber security concerns.

The two countries have fought only one war, in 1962, when India suffered a heavy defeat.

An agreement was signed in 1996 barring the use of guns and explosives from the Line of Actual Control, as the disputed border is known. It has held, although China did accuse Indian troops of firing warning shots in Ladakh last September.

What is Sikkim’s strategic significance?

The tiny east Himalayan region has been a key flashpoint between India and China for decades. It saw clashes in their 1962 war. Five years later, fighting along its border left several hundred soldiers dead on either side.

The former kingdom was an Indian protectorate at the time, and only became the country’s 22nd state after a referendum in 1975.

Sikkim is near a high-altitude plateau known as Doklam in India and Donglang in China.

India fears that greater Chinese road access to the plateau would threaten India’s strategically vulnerable “chicken’s neck”, the 20km (12-mile) wide Siliguri Corridor that links seven north-eastern states, including Assam, to the rest of the country.

The border in Sikkim is also crucial for another reason. Indian military experts say it’s the only area through which India could make an offensive response to a Chinese incursion, and the only stretch of the Himalayan frontier where Indian troops have a terrain and tactical advantage. They have higher ground, and the Chinese positions there are squeezed between India and Bhutan.

Read original article here

Indian mathematician Nikhil Srivastava is joint winner of maths prize

Indian mathematician Nikhil Srivastava, has been named winner of the prestigious 2021 Michael and Sheila Held Prize along with two others for solving long-standing questions on the Kadison–Singer problem and on Ramanujan graphs. Srivastava from the University of California, Berkeley, Adam Marcus, from the Ecole polytechnique federale de Lausanne (EPFL) and Daniel Alan Spielman from Yale University will receive the 2021 Michael and Sheila Held Prize, the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S. said in the statement.

The prize consists of a medal and $100,000. Srivastava, Marcus and Spielman solved long-standing questions on the Kadison–Singer problem and on Ramanujan graphs, and in the process uncovered a deep new connection between linear algebra, geometry of polynomials and graph theory that has inspired the next generation of theoretical computer scientists, it said.

They published new constructions of Ramanujan graphs, that describe sparse, but highly-connected networks, and a solution to what is known as the Kadison–Singer problem. This is a decades-old problem that asks whether unique information can be gleaned from a system in which only some features can be observed or measured, according to the Yale news.

Srivastava is currently Associate Professor of Mathematics at the University of California.

Their ground breaking papers on the questions, both published in 2015, solved problems that mathematicians had been working on for several decades, the National Academy of Sciences said.

“Their proofs provided new tools to address numerous other problems, which have been embraced by other computer scientists seeking to apply the geometry of polynomials to solve discrete optimisation problems,” the academy said.

The Michael and Sheila Held Prize is presented annually and honours outstanding, innovative, creative, and influential research in the areas of combinatorial and discrete optimisation, or related parts of computer science, such as the design and analysis of algorithms and complexity theory.

The prize was established in 2017 by the bequest of Michael And Sheila Held.

You have reached your limit for free articles this month.

Subscription Benefits Include

Today’s Paper

Find mobile-friendly version of articles from the day’s newspaper in one easy-to-read list.

Unlimited Access

Enjoy reading as many articles as you wish without any limitations.

Personalised recommendations

A select list of articles that match your interests and tastes.

Faster pages

Move smoothly between articles as our pages load instantly.

Dashboard

A one-stop-shop for seeing the latest updates, and managing your preferences.

Briefing

We brief you on the latest and most important developments, three times a day.

Support Quality Journalism.

*Our Digital Subscription plans do not currently include the e-paper, crossword and print.

Read original article here