Occupy protests: a four step guide to bypassing high-street banks

Posted on December 8, 2011 by editor

Solomon Islands feather money

You’ve read about the Occupy Wall Street and London protests

You’ve read about the Occupy Wall Street and London protests and you know about corporate greed (and the banking bail-out) but how can you do something about it?

Read the original article on The Ecologist website

THERE ARE MANY REASONS to be disillusioned with conventional banks. Take tar-sands for example, financed by consortiums of commercial banks lending money through direct loans, and investment banks facilitating bond issuance. Unconventional oils rely heavily on conventional finance, and indeed, major UK banks are often more than happy to lend to huge corporates regardless of their environmental and human rights records.

Major banks claim to serve the needs of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), but the financial crisis has demonstrated that most of their lending goes into speculative investment, creating bubbles in property and commodity prices, creating economic instability and negatively impacting poorer countries. Through these activities senior bankers have earned huge sums underwritten by taxpayer funded bailouts, and then, to top it all, have avoided paying tax using webs of tax havens.

The Occupy movement is one form of protest against this system, but there are other ways of expressing dissent. A banking oligopoly is in nobody’s best interest, so why not challenge it directly by delinking yourself from it. Here are four strategies to do that.

Strategy 1: Switching bank accounts

When you deposit money with major banks, you may be indirectly supporting negative activities. You are also providing them with a cheap source of funding that they can use to subsidise more risky aspects of their business, like investment banking trading.

Switching bank accounts to a socially responsible bank is a good first step. When it comes to social responsibility, there are two broad areas where banks might seek to distinguish themselves. Firstly, there are those like the Co-operative Bank that avoid lending to companies with dubious environmental or social records. Secondly, there are financial institutions with a localist bias, such as certain building societies, focused on serving the interests of their members rather than those of disconnected external shareholders.

An interesting new entrant to high-street banking is Metro Bank, currently operating in Greater London. Like the Co-op and building societies, it does not have an attached investment banking arm, maintaining a focus on straightforward banking services.

If you want to proactively steer your money into eco-friendly building projects, consider the Ecology Building Society, which specialises in providing sustainable mortgages. Triodos Bank does not provide current account facilities, but does offer savings accounts. They invest in projects with positive environmental, social or cultural outcomes, and provide a high degree of transparency about their lending by project.

Charity Bank provides financial services for charities and social enterprises, and their savings accounts are a good option for those who wish to directly support the social sector.

Credit unions are non-profit, localised clubs of individuals pooling money together through savings and current accounts. They charge membership fees, but offer affordable personal loans to those who otherwise might not get access to finance, boosting financial inclusion and breaking the power of loan-sharks.

Strategy 2: Investing directly in ethical alternatives

If you are looking to invest any spare cash you have, consider ethical investment funds (see the Ecologist’s guide to ethical investments). Check any prospectus of an ethical fund to see what their investment philosophy is. Many of them operate on the (often shallow) principle of ‘negative screening’ – not investing in bad things. Others take a more proactive stance, deliberately investing in companies seen to have a positive environmental and social impact. A small minority are ‘activist funds’, which take ownership positions in companies in order to reform them or keep a watch on them.

For those looking for new approaches, check out Abundance Generation. It’s set to launch early next year with the aim of allowing individuals to invest directly in renewable energy. You can choose wind or solar farms and lend money to them in the form of debentures. Director Bruce Davis plans to allow a very low minimum investment (£5), allowing small retail investors into a space hitherto unavailable to them. The payout is directly linked to how well the renewable energy farms do, and the income earned can go into offsetting your normal energy bill.

If you are less interested in financial returns, consider alternative investments that are set up primarily to generate social benefit. Community shares are being piloted as a way of supporting local community projects, and charitable bonds are an interesting new mechanism that allows you to invest in social housing whilst supporting charities. Another one to keep a lookout for is Ethex, currently being set up to help steer money into social enterprises. It’s set for launch in early 2012.

Bear in mind that unconventional investments might be illiquid – meaning that once you invest in them, they might be hard to get out of. Also, like any investment, there is the risk that they might fail. Some schemes that claim to be ethical have the potential to be abusive or misleading – take for example dodgy ‘green fuel’ investments. Make sure to read the fine print and take advice before you invest.

Strategy 3: Don’t give them interest – Borrow from alternative sources

If you’re going to pay interest on a bank loan, you might as well pay it to a socially responsible bank, but what about leaving banks behind entirely? Next time you need a personal loan, consider experimenting with the emergent technologies of peer-to-peer (‘P2P’) finance. Zopa is a well-known example, allowing you to obtain personal loans directly from another individual without a bank taking a cut in the middle.

Need some start-up capital for a project you want to launch? Crowd-funding – the process of drawing on networks of individuals to fund you – offers great new possibilities. Check out platforms such as BuzzBnk for social enterprises, and Sponsume, WeFund and Indiegogo for creative projects such as film, music and fashion.

Strategy 4: The final frontier – Hitching up with alternative currencies

Perhaps the most subversive strategy is to delink from the mainstream currency system. Localised complementary currencies are already being piloted in several areas, including the Brixton Pound, Lewes Pound and Totnes Pound. These aim to keep money circulating within a local area, promoting small independent business. The Brixton pound team has recently added an innovative pay-by-text scheme, based on the Monea system. These need popular support to gain strength, so how about piloting a scheme in your own area?

Emergent online currencies such as Bitcoin are causing a big splash among tech-geeks and hackers worldwide, but online mutual credit systems such as Ripple are worth exploring for a more localised alternative. Ripple is a system allowing people to enter into IOUs with each other through trust networks. A similar concept is found in LETS, (local exchange trading system), a type of mutual credit system found in London and elsewhere, allowing communities to record and exchange services rendered to each other. Timebanking is an innovative attempt to codify units of time as a way to conduct exchange.

It’s been suggested that money emerged through attempts to measure systems of reciprocity, so one way to disrupt formalised money is to go back to basics and hook into the gift economy. Twitter is providing a platform for some fun experiments in this regard. Check out Twollars, a currency of appreciation, and #Punkmoney, a recent attempt to create a gift currency.

What’s next? You are

The landscape of sustainable finance is being created right here and right now, so why not get involved in creating it? Can you think of unique methods to finance energy efficiency projects? Can you work out ways to bypass banks whilst doing international currency transfer? If you’ve got ideas, think about approaching forums the Finance Innovation Lab, run jointly by WWF and ICAEW, where you can find like-minded people and support for your projects.

Brett Scott is a writer and independent consultant specialising in financial activism and innovative finance

Posted in Banks, Democracy, Dissent, Occupy | Leave a comment

Greenpeace asks us to watch closely, repost widely.

Posted on July 8, 2011 by editor

This short Greenpeace film was pulled without explanation or warning from YouTube and Vimeo. So we are asked to spread it as widely as possible.

Here’s the embed code for Episode I:
<iframe src=”http://greenpeacenordic.23video.com/v.ihtml?token=718ae6f308dee72a89acd52bee5c4fcf&photo%5fid=2224824″ width=”640″ height=”380″ frameborder=”0″ border=”0″ scrolling=”no”></iframe>

Episode II is viewable from the thumbnails at the end of Episode I.

REBEL MANIFESTO

Our home—Earth—is in trouble. VW opposes key environmental laws we need if we’re going to stop our planet going the way of Alderaan (bye bye). But all is not lost. We feel the good in Volkswagen.

All of us in the Rebellion are calling on Volkswagen to turn away from the Dark Side and give our planet a chance.

Support strong CO2 emissions cuts.

Despite its green image, Volkswagen is spending millions of Euros every year funding lobby groups who are trying to stop Europe increasing its commitment to greenhouse gas reductions from 20% to 30% by 2020. Progressive companies – from Google to Ikea, Sony, Unilever and Philips – support the target. Volkswagen can’t afford to be left behind.

Support strong fuel efficiency standards.

More efficient cars are cheaper to run, use less oil and emit less CO2. Volkswagen has a history of lobbying against the strong European standards that we need to kick our oil addiction. As the biggest car company in Europe, with the biggest responsibility, VW must change and support strong standards from now on.

Put your technology where your mouth is.

Volkswagen says it wants to be “the most eco-friendly automaker in the world”, but only 6% of the cars it sold in 2010 were its most efficient models. It has the technology to do better. VW must set out its plan to make its entire fleet oil-free by 2040.

(Read the report for full details)

Posted in Capitalism, Climate change, Corporations, Environment | Leave a comment

Johann Hari: David Cameron’s latest con

Posted on March 21, 2011 by editor
Posted in Capitalism, UK, UnCuts | Leave a comment

Please stop American corporations buying up India’s water

Posted on February 28, 2011 by editor

Please read and sign the petition drawn up by the Peoples’ Campaign for Right to Water (Karnataka state), India. It is really important to prevent people’s water being sold off over their heads. I will add resources about the water situation in Karnataka and elsewhere.

US WATER TRADE MISSION, GO BACK!

To: US Department of Commerce

After a series of water privatisation programs in Karnataka, the governments of India and the United States hatched a larger plan to convert all our water into a huge profit opportunity. The US Government and a group of American business executives are coming to India on February 28th and in their words, they will be here on a mission to Tap the $50 billion Indian Water Market. That water is a life giver which should be equitably conserved and shared by all life forms and forever could be destroyed because the Americans have other plans. That is to quietly infiltrate our country with the idea that water is a business product just like any other on which America can exercise hegemony.

Public opinion and common sense are being overwhelmed by a dangerous nexus between politicians, corporate leaders, bureaucrats and foreign governments. Like a vulture that seeks out vulnerability from great distances, US corporate forces with an eye on water have smelt their kill in India and are descending for a feast.

The US water trade mission selected Bangalore as a first destination because the same nexus has been active for a decade and Karnataka is now being promoted as the water privatisation capital of the world. Instead of responding to the basic water needs of people in the state or to conserve water resources, successive state governments from the late 90s have been happily signing up one project after another with international banks and foreign governments to privatise every aspect of their constitutional responsibility of providing clean potable drinking water for all.

International private companies and their consultants in Karnataka directly influence water policy, assess needs, design infrastructure and manufacture public consent. They have taken over the operation and maintenance of water supply in five cities including Mysore, Hubli, Dharwad, Belgaum and Gulbarga. None of these decisions are informed, discussed or debated in democratic institutions or in the public realm. Information is suppressed and decisions manipulated.

The government of Karnataka is paying hundreds of crores of rupees to such private companies /consultants and signing agreements that are unduly biased against the public in Karnataka and itself. Like the British East India Company which got all the resources it wanted as well arrogated an illegitimate right to rule and divide the country, the US Water Trade Mission is aimed at complete corporate control over water resources as well as our sovereignty.

The mission statement openly suggests that the purpose of the mission is to expose U.S. firms to Indias rapidly expanding water and waste water market and to assist U.S. companies to seize export opportunities in this sector. The deliberate use of words like – water market, water trade – underlines the intention of transforming our traditional idea of water as a natural resource to that of a product that can be traded or which you access depending on your ability to pay for it.

The idea that the state is a people elected institution for their well being is also being made nonessential.

The mission statement also promises additional opportunities in providing consulting and design services to the Indian water industry. The Americans want us to believe that it does not rain water but is produced in an industry and that the constitutional responsibility of the state is an industrial activity. It further offers networking opportunities, current market information and a platform for policy discussions with the local Municipal Corporations. The arrogance of the mission rests on its ability to get the Government of Karnataka state to hold water related policy discussions with them. This is also ironic as the state has never discussed such policies with the public.

Clearly, the US Water Trade Mission is a historical event, both for the Americans who want to establish control over our water and for those in Karnataka who want to uphold the character of water as a common good and protect it from being exploited for private profits at the cost of equity, ecological justice and the rights of all peoples – present and future.

We protest this attempt by the American Water Industry. We will not allow our water to become a commodity. The US water trade mission needs to go back. We will not allow them here.
Sincerely,

Please sign the petition here.

For more information please visit this page, from where you can also sign the petition.

Posted in Corporations, Environment, India, USA, Water | 1 Comment

Behind the Arab revolt is a word we dare not speak

Posted on February 27, 2011 by editor

JOHN PILGER, JOHNPILGER.COM 24 FEBRUARY 2011

Shortly after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, I interviewed Ray McGovern, one of an elite group of CIA officers who prepared the President’s daily intelligence brief. McGovern was at the apex of the “national security” monolith that is American power and had retired with presidential plaudits. On the eve of the invasion, he and 45 other senior officers of the CIA and other intelligence agencies wrote to President George W. Bush that the “drumbeat for war” was based not on intelligence, but lies.

“It was 95 per cent charade,” McGovern told me.

“How did they get away with it?”

“The press allowed the crazies to get away with it.”

“Who are the crazies?”

“The people running the [Bush] administration have a set of beliefs a lot like those expressed in Mein Kampf… these are the same people who were referred to in the circles in which I moved, at the top, as ‘the crazies’.”

I said, “Norman Mailer has written that that he believes America has entered a pre-fascist state. What’s your view of that?”

“Well… I hope he’s right, because there are others saying we are already in a fascist mode.”

On 22 January, Ray McGovern emailed me to express his disgust at the Obama administration’s barbaric treatment of the alleged whistleblower Bradley Manning and its pursuit of WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange. “Way back when George and Tony decided it might be fun to attack Iraq,” he wrote, “I said something to the effect that fascism had already begun here. I have to admit I did not think it would get this bad this quickly.”

On 16 February, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech at George Washington University in which she condemned governments that arrested protestors and crushed free expression. She lauded the liberating power of the internet while failing to mention that her government was planning to close down those parts of the internet that encouraged dissent and truth-telling. It was a speech of spectacular hypocrisy, and Ray McGovern was in the audience. Outraged, he rose from his chair and silently turned his back on Clinton. He was immediately seized by police and a security goon and beaten to the floor, dragged out and thrown into jail, bleeding. He has sent me photographs of his injuries. He is 71. During the assault, which was clearly visible to Clinton, she did not pause in her remarks.

Fascism is a difficult word, because it comes with an iconography that touches the Nazi nerve and is abused as propaganda against America’s official enemies and to promote the West’s foreign adventures with a moral vocabulary written in the struggle against Hitler. And yet fascism and imperialism are twins. In the aftermath of world war two, those in the imperial states who had made respectable the racial and cultural superiority of “western civilisation”, found that Hitler and fascism had claimed the same, employing strikingly similar methods. Thereafter, the very notion of American imperialism was swept from the textbooks and popular culture of an imperial nation forged on the genocidal conquest of its native people. And a war on social justice and democracy became “US foreign policy”.

As the Washington historian William Blum has documented, since 1945, the US has destroyed or subverted more than 50 governments, many of them democracies, and used mass murderers like Suharto, Mobutu and Pinochet to dominate by proxy. In the Middle East, every dictatorship and pseudo-monarchy has been sustained by America. In “Operation Cyclone”, the CIA and MI6 secretly fostered and bank-rolled Islamic extremism. The object was to smash or deter nationalism and democracy. The victims of this western state terrorism have been mostly Muslims. The courageous people gunned down last week in Bahrain and Libya, the latter a “priority UK market”, according to Britain’s official arms “procurers”, join those children blown to bits in Gaza by the latest American F-16 aircraft.

The revolt in the Arab world is not merely against a resident dictator but a worldwide economic tyranny designed by the US Treasury and imposed by the US Agency for International Development, the IMF and World Bank, which have ensured that rich countries like Egypt are reduced to vast sweatshops, with half the population earning less than $2 a day. The people’s triumph in Cairo was the first blow against what Benito Mussolini called corporatism, a word that appears in his definition of fascism.

JOHN PILGER, JOHNPILGER.COM 24 FEBRUARY 2011

How did such extremism take hold in the liberal West? “It is necessary to destroy hope, idealism, solidarity, and concern for the poor and oppressed,” observed Noam Chomsky a generation ago, “[and] to replace these dangerous feelings with self-centred egoism, a pervasive cynicism that holds that [an order of] inequities and oppression is the best that can be achieved. In fact, a great international propaganda campaign is under way to convince people – particularly young people – that this not only is what they should feel but that it’s what they do feel.”

Like the European revolutions of 1848 and the uprising against Stalinism in 1989, the Arab revolt has rejected fear. An insurrection of suppressed ideas, hope and solidarity has begun. In the United States, where 45 per cent of young African-Americans have no jobs and the top hedge fund managers are paid, on average, a billion dollars a year, mass protests against cuts in services and jobs have spread to heartland states like Wisconsin. In Britain, the fastest-growing modern protest movement, UK Uncut, is about to take direct action against tax avoiders and rapacious banks. Something has changed that cannot be unchanged. The enemy has a name now.

Posted in Capitalism, Conflict, Corporations, Democracy, Dissent, Egypt, Freedom struggle, Media, Middle East, Palestine, UK, UnCuts, USA, Wikileaks, World | Leave a comment

State of Chhattisgarh Versus Dr. Binayak Sen

Posted on February 21, 2011 by editor
By Radha Surya, Countercurrents.org, 21 February, 2011

There is an image that torments our collective conscience. This is the image that shows Dr. Binayak Sen sitting inside a police vehicle after he was awarded a life sentence by the Raipur Sessions Court in Chhattisgarh. An observer who was present on that bleak December day said that he looked completely defeated when the judgement was delivered. On December 24 as in the widely circulated photo from the years 2007-2009, Dr. Binayak Sen’s hand rests on the barred window of the police van. But this time he looks straight ahead rather than the world outside the van. His clouded, despairing gaze is that of a doomed man who already in his mind’s eye sees the inexorable prison walls closing in on him.

It has been said many times before by those who have first hand knowledge of the situation in Chhattisgarh. An all-powerful nexus consisting of the Chhattisgarh government, police and judiciary and acting on behalf of business interests had set its sights on Dr. Binayak Sen. In his capacity of human rights activist, he had played a key role in exposing the true nature of the state sponsored vigilante group the murderous Salwa Judum. Under the pretext of being a spontaneous anti-Naxalite people’s movement, the Salwa Judum ran amok in the tribal areas of Chhattisgarh killing large numbers of villagers and herding survivors into refugee camps. This forcible clearing of villages by the government paved the way for the appropriation of the resource rich areas of the state by mining and manufacturing interests. Dr. Binayak Sen’s outspoken condemnation of the perpetration of state violence for advancing the interests of private capital made him an enemy of the state—someone who had to be silenced at all costs. The Chhattisgarh police force had its own vendetta to wage against Dr. Sen. For them he was a marked man from the time he drew attention to encounter killings and other atrocities committed by the police.

The rejection of Dr. Binayak Sen’s bail application by the Chattisgarh High Court on February 10 is the most recent in the series of blows that have been dealt by a vindictive state apparatus. It had been hoped—not unreasonably–that at least the High Court would uphold ordinary standards of legally permissible evidence. The hearing of the bail application took place over the period from January 24-February 10 with a lengthy break from January 25-February 8. As it happened one of the judges absolutely had to go on leave during this critical period. Concomitantly national campaigns seeking justice for Dr. Binayak Sen went into high gear. A group of artists that included well known and respected film personalities wrote to the Prime Minister appealing to him to press for a judicial review of the verdict and urgently undo the injustice being done to Dr Binayak Sen. The international campaign too stepped up its efforts and conveyed unmistakable anxiety to secure justice for Dr Binayak Sen. All the signs were propitious. The European Union Human Rights Commission obtained permission to attend the bail hearing and a number of Nobel Laureates rallied behind their imprisoned colleague. In response, the all powerful Chhattisgarh state apparatus and its loyalists struck back by representing the expression of international concern as a matter of controversy.

Supposedly the EU representatives who were present at the Chhattisgarh High Court hearing of Dr. Binayak Sen’s bail application had overstepped their boundaries. So had the Nobel Laureates forty of whom had signed a statement that was released on the eve of the court’s announcement of its decision. The statement referred to the blatantly unfair trial of Dr. Binayak Sen and made an appeal for his release on bail. The call for justice made by the Nobel Laureates and the presence of EU observers in court evoked howls of protest among some speakers in TV debates that followed the refusal of bail to Dr. Sen. The talking heads were irate that the Nobel Laureates had failed to pay due deference to the Indian state and its institutions. For them the scandal consisted not in the travesty of justice that has been witnessed in the persecution of Dr. Binayak Sen but the taking cognizance thereof by international observers. The obvious seemed to elude the comprehension of the ultra-nationalists. Or maybe they understood and were left frothing at the mouth because the shining work of Dr Binayak Sen, uncompromising human rights activist and physician selflessly devoted to the service of the otherwise abandoned and neglected tribal inhabitants of Chhattisgarh, had won him friends and admirers and garnered respect and recognition across the world.

With the appropriateness of the so-called internationalization of Dr. Sen’s trial becoming a topic of discussion on the news channels, the family members who spoke on his behalf were placed in the unimaginably bizarre position of having to explain and even apologize for the international dimensions of the shock and outrage with which Dr Sen’s conviction has been received. On CNN-IBN–and no doubt other venues as well–Dr. Ilina Sen was asked if she had recruited foreign support because she had lost faith in India’s judicial system. She answered that the Nobel Laureates had not acted at her request and that she had not approached them. That she should have been required to make this disclaimer is nothing short of outrageous. Consider the facts. Ever since Dr Binayak Sen was convicted on December 24 a searchlight has been trained on the trial proceedings. Fabrication of “evidence” by the prosecution, inconsistencies in key facts such as date and place of arrest of alleged co-courier Piyush Guha, reliance on inferences shown to be incorrect to the point of being laughable–all of these have been brought out by a flood of commentary. The term kangaroo court has been used by credible observers in connection with the Raipur court that handed a life sentence to Dr. Binayak Sen. In view of all this it is rather rich that Dr. Sen’s wife while still reeling from the trauma of the rejection of the bail application should be called on to implicitly refute the charge of being anti-national and to affirm her faith in the judicial process. The fact that she kept her self-possession is further testimony to the remarkable fortitude and courage of a woman who has been made to go through hell since Dr. Binayak Sen’s arrest in May 2007.

At every step the reasonable and legitimate hopes and expectations of Binayak and Ilina Sen, family members, supporters and well wishers have been dashed to the ground by a vindictive state apparatus. With the Chhattisgarh High Court refusing to loosen the coils that have been wound around the life, liberty and work of Binayak Sen, Ilina Sen has declared her intention of moving the Supreme Court in an expedient manner. In the mean time Dr Binayak Sen is suffering out his incarceration in the Raipur jail’s maximum security division where the living conditions are worse than those of zoo animals. Ilina Sen has said that the cells in the maximum security unit are merely five iron cages with no facilities in a large courtyard. Dr. Sen is known to be a heart patient. Unsurprisingly the otherwise vociferous ultra nationalists have not alluded to the savage treatment meted out to a sick man by the State. Dr. Sen is kept in isolation and is not allowed to read newspapers. Can we at least hope that the apex court will give a favorable hearing to the call for a modicum of justice? Even Home Minister Chidambaram, an unquestioning proponent if any of state power, has acknowledged that a miscarriage of justice could have taken place. There is no remaining recourse if the Supreme Court refuses to overturn the judgement which has committed Dr. Binayak Sen to a tomb while still alive. That Ilina Sen has mentally confronted that eventuality is clear from her calm statement–they would then join the thousands of others in India who live and die with injustice.

Why did Dr. Binayak Sen give room to the remorseless forces which are rending apart his life? Why oh why did he not ask in 2007 for transference of the trial to a state other than Chhattisgarh? This question has been answered in an interview given by Ilina Sen. She said they believed they would get justice in Chhattisgarh. Another reason may also be surmised. Dr. Sen moved to Chhattisgarh in the early 80s and dedicated his life’s work to alleviating the hardships of life for a tribal population whom the state regarded as undeserving of its services. Maybe he reasoned that his seeking a change of venue for the trial would result in feelings of hostility being engendered amidst the general populace of Chhattisgarh. This in turn would have made his remaining in Chhattisgarh untenable and necessitated the abandonment of the tribal inhabitants whom he served and who depended on him. Such speculation is far from implausible in light of what is known about the selfless nobility of Dr. Binayak Sen. The day he was arrested he had requested the police for permission to attend his medical clinic as some of his patients needed urgent medical attention. The scale and reach of his work as a physician has been brought out by the human rights activist Nandita Haksar. In her book on Dr. Binayak Sen she has written that by jailing the doctor, the state has effectively deprived people, living in more than 200 villages, of access to any medical care (“Binayak’s patients await treatment,” Times of India, December 31 2010).

For his well wishers and those closest to him there is reason for anguish in each additional day that Dr. Binayak Sen remains in incarceration. Looking ahead into the future one can foresee that the activists will recover eventually from the shock of the rejection of the bail appeal. They will regroup and resume their efforts. Once again the rallies will be held and calls made for justice. The campaigners have to continue in the hope that the mighty and the powerful can be made to see that it is in their interest to undo the mockery of justice implicit in the persecution of Dr. Binayak Sen. What other recourse is there?

Posted in Censorship, Conflict, Forests, Freedom struggle, Human Rights, India, Maoist rebellion, Urgent Action | Leave a comment

“I try to hope that I will live again with Binayak in my lifetime”

Posted on February 21, 2011 by editor

Dr ILINA SEN, well-known social activist and feminist scholar, who currently heads the Department of Women’s Studies in Mahatma Gandhi University, Wardha, Maharshtra speaks in detail to M SUCHITRA about her husband’s trial and her appeal to the Chhatisgarh High Court. Republished here by kind permission of M Suchitra and Quest. Original article.

14 February 2011 – My first meeting with Ilina Sen was when I visited Dr Binayak Sen for an interview at Christian Medical College, Vellore in June 2009. After two years in a Chhattisgarh jail Binayak Sen had been admitted to hospital for heart surgery. He was quite drained out, and it was Ilina who filled in the details and even completed many an answer for her husband. Neither of them was keen to dwell on personal problems or the physical and mental trauma they had undergone. I had found Ilina to be a person with strength and determination. She had seen me out of the hospital room with a warm hug.

Dr Ilina Sen currently heads the Department of Women’s Studies in Mahatma Gandhi University, Wardha, Maharshtra. Pic: The Quest. Nineteen months on, Ilina is unable to reconcile with the fact that Binayak has been sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment for sedition and conspiracy against the state. She is distressed by the denial of justice and the invectives of the lower court. But her words have not lost their fire and firmness. On 26 January, in a letter to those who support the campaign for the release of Binayak Sen, she wrote: “Dear Friends, as we celebrate 61 years of India becoming a Socialist Democratic Republic we are shocked to witness that the spirit of our Constitution stands violated every so often today, sacrificing people’s democratic rights and throttling the socialist dream of our Constitution makers.” In this interview, Dr Ilina Sen, well-known social activist and feminist scholar, who currently heads the Department of Women’s Studies in Mahatma Gandhi University, Wardha in Maharshtra speaks in detail about the trail, verdict and expresses her anxiety about the diminishing space of democracy.

Dr Binayak Sen has completed more than a month in the second phase of his imprisonment. What is his condition in the jail? Are you allowed to visit him regularly?

I have only seen him once, on the 27th. As a convicted prisoner, he has fewer rights, and can have visitors only once in 15 days. I was told that he is in a maximum security cell. This is a small courtyard with five cells (cages with iron grills like in the older zoos), in which Binayak, Piyush, Sanyal and three others are kept. In 24 hours, they are let out only for six hours into the courtyard, and meet no one else except each other and the guards. One newspaper is given to Sanyal, with ‘sensitive’ news cut out, none yet for Binayak. I do not know the legality of this but know that this kind of treatment for a prolonged period can drive one to insanity. The jail superintendent refused to discuss prison conditions with us, and said they would be having a meeting to discuss how the enemies of the state were to be kept.

What is the current state of the case? It could be really a testing time for you.

We have filed an appeal in the high court against the verdict of the district sessions court. The hearing for the suspension of the sentence is going on. It is not a testing time for us alone but more for our political and judicial systems, which are on trial for accountability, rationality, justice and equity.

Was the verdict totally unexpected? Or during the trial, at any stage, had you felt the judgment is going to be harsh?

We were aware of the way in which the police kept proclaiming that there was pacca sabut (definitive evidence) against Binayak, even when nothing was turning up in court. Sometime in 2009, a spiral bound book with highlights of the evidence from our computer was presented to the court. This had bloomers like my supposed correspondence with the ISI (Indian Social Institute), invitation from Apoorvanand, professor at Delhi University to a ‘resistance’ conference, and a remark from a friend that ‘there is a chimpanzee in the White House. Much of this was funny, and we felt the prosecution was resorting to this because there was no evidence to be found. We realized that this trial had become an embarrassment for the state of Chhattisgarh, so we felt that a conviction on some public security act related offence, with a sentence covering the two years he had already spent in jail, may be an outcome that would save the state’s face. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine this conviction for sedition, and the sentence of a life in prison.

For the last three years you have been going through tremendous emotional and physical trauma.

This has been a complete nightmare – beginning with Binayak’s arrest and the vilification campaign against both of us. There is no letting up even now. The local press has served as a complete tool of the police – I do not know how to explain this. Perhaps this is paid news, perhaps an example of a backward and sectarian consciousness. I am deeply affected by this humiliation and loss of image, and also worried because Binayk’s crucifixion was preceded by exactly this kind of campaign against him. I was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2009, quite possibly a result in some way of the enormous physical and mental trauma I had undergone. I have had six cycles of chemotherapy, and am better now.

What is the society’s response to you and your daughters while Binayak is away in jail? Any changes in the attitude of your friends and relatives? Is there any tendency to keep your family at a distance?

In the middle class colony where we have our home in Raipur, there is a definite turning away of face among our neighbours. Many causal acquaintances refuse to make eye contact. But friends and relatives who have known us well have stood by staunchly in support, as have Binayak’s patients from among the workers and the tribal community where he worked.

Did you and your children have to face harassment from the police?

All the time. The state government and the police would like to finish Binayak, his work and his family. I was threatened in court once when I was arguing to be able to speak with Binayak with the police guard who had brought binayak to court, by the investigating officer that I too would be ‘phansaod’ [entangled] in a naxal case.

“I do not want to be another martyr, another reluctant heroine. If I have to leave (India) for survival, I will.” • Freedom of speech over sedition • Consultation on sedition laws (external)

A few days ago, a case has been registered against you by the Maharashtra government.What was the context for this case?

It was a totally misconceived case under Foreiners Act. The case was registered immediately after after the three-day national conference organized by the Indian Association for Women’s Studies (IAWS) at Wardha during the last week of January. I am an executive member of the IAWS. There were three foreigners as the invited plenary speakers. Zahida Hina from Pakistan, Shahina Akhtar from Bangladesh and Penniya from Sri lanka. For these three foreign invitees, we had taken all clearances from the Central Ministies of Home. External Affairs and Women and Child Development. Even then, the police entered into Yatri Niwas at 2.30 in the morning where a large number of women participants, who were mainly students and teachers from universities across the country, were staying.

Are you liable for not informing the police about the foreign invitees?

No. Under this Act hotels and commercial places of residence are liable for not registering foreigners with the police , but not private citizens. What is intersting is that the case against me was filed by the Anti Terrorism Squad from Nagpur, not the Wardha police. It is not clear how they come into the picture. Anyway, because of the public pressure, no one actually contacted or touched me. The Home Ministry has now issued a statement saying they are asking the Maharashtra government to take the case back, but I have no idea whether they have actually done so. My understanding is that once a case has been filed it can only be resolved through the magistrate’s court.

Were you present in the court during Binayak’s trials that ended up in the sentence for rigorous life imprisonment? Had there been any efforts to influence your lawyer?

I was present during major chunks of the trial but not the entire thing. It was an unfair prosecution. Throughout the trial there were references made to me, although I was not an accused and was not being tried. I do not think any one influenced our lawyers. They were very dedicated, and did a great job. We lost the case not because we had bad lawyers, but because we had an unfair judiciary that was intimidated by the severe police pressure that was brought to bear on the court.

What were the evidences against Binayak? Were the evidences strong enough to force the court to deliver such judgment? How could the court establish Binayak had close association with maoists?

There was no evidence. His meetings with Piyush were disproved in court, the jailors who were present during his meetings with Sanyal were categorical that the letters could not have exchanged hands, an unsigned letter from the CPI Maoist, which the police claimed was seized from our house, was a plant. It was not signed by Binayak or the investigating officer as were other seized items, and was not part of the seizure memo. Despite this the court followed the allegations of the charge sheet. The judgment says Rupantar (An NGO founded by Dr Binayak and Ilina Sen) employed the hard core Maoists Shankar Singh and Amita. In fact, who are they? Do they have any connection with the Maoists? And what about Malti? Shankar Singh worked with Rupantar in 2004 and 2005.We had first met him at the Asia Social Forum in Hyderabad at a dalit workshop. He said he worked with the railways, but wanted to work in the NGO sector. He came to Raipur, and asked whether he could work with Rupantar. He helped us with the urban slum teaching. He went home for Diwali in 2005, and called from somewhere in Uttar Pradesh that he would not be returning since his father had unexpectedly died. Amita had been working (according to police evidence) for sometime in Raipur, before she met me with the reference of her research guide, Prof Lalbahadur Verma, who is known to me. Since she was looking for work, I suggested she try the school where my daughters studied. She got his job, and apparently disappeared under mysterious circumstances. She must have visited my home a total of five or six times. The police say Shankar and Amita were hardcore naxalites but have provided no proof of this. They have not shown them as charged or convicted with any offence anywhere in India. A woman named Shanti Priya alias Malti was convicted in a Raipur court of a naxal related offence. The police claim that she is the wife of a big naxal leader. The police a;so claim that one Malti who is mentioned in a Rupantar document is this same Malti. Our defence witness had claified that Malti who worked for Rupantar was Malti Jadhav, and gave her address. But this was not taken into account by the court.

Do you feel the judgment is a part of a larger conspiracy?

I definitely think so.

In connection with Binayak’s conviction, Union Home Minister P Chidambaram’s response to the media was “those who respect democracy should respect the processes of democracy, and those who respect law should respect the processes of law.” What do you think about his comment?

I would like to believe in the legal system, and that is why we have gone through this trial which turned out to be a kangaroo trial, and are in the process of fighting for bail. Had we not believed in the rule of law as well as Binayak’s innocence, it would have been so easy to jump bail after 2009. However, in a democracy, we have a right to maintain a critical watch on the judicial system.

I had visited Bastar last year and felt fear and suspicion was looming in the atmosphere. Everybody, including NGOs, was scared to speak openly. After Binayak’s conviction the situation must have worsened?

Chhattisgarh is a highly paranoid police state. I don’t think people from Kerala or elsewhere can even understand what it is like unless they have been there.

It has been a decade since the state of Chhattisgarh was formed for the development if the tribes. But now what is really happening there?

Chhattisgarh is a highly paranoid police state, says Ilina Sen. Pic: The Quest. The tragedy is that Chhattisgarh had many examples of people -centered development pioneered by organizations like Chhattisgarh Mines Shramik Sangh as well as small NGOs. Unfortunately, the new state chose to ignore these efforts and concentrated on a strategy of mega development based on mining and industrialization, this has led to large-scale displacement, including displacement of tribals and loss of livelihood. You cannot preserve adivasi lifestyle, merely by showcasing dances at republic day parades.

In 2010, sedition cases were registered against six prominent persons, including Binayak and Arundhati Roy. Others were also human right activists.

I think the sedition law was the creation of a colonial state, which has itself scrapped it now. It is a sad situation when people who speak against unequal growth and human rights violations are termed seditious.

In recent years many stringent legisjations have been passed in the country in the name of combating terrorism. Are they really necessary?

I think we would not need these laws if we had more inclusive growth, and greater space for democratic dissent.

Do you feel democracy is slowly eroding in India, especially in the central India?

I do feel so, but is not only in central India.

Can we say, in Chhattisgarh, all the four pillars of democracy are now in the grip of big corporates?

Yes, of the corporates, and a collusive, intolerant government.

Then, how come that the Raman Singh government got elected again in the state? How do they manage to win elections? Do they enjoy the support of the public?

A large part of the middle class is now completely self-centered. They are in the grip of virulent consumerism. They are shockingly indifferent towards the issues around them. Also, there are large-scale electoral rigging especially in tribal regions like Bastar. There have been many reports of rigged and fake elections.

The court termed you an international terrorist. What provoked the court to deliver such comment?

The film Khuda Keliye portrays exactly this phenomenon. Perhaps the general education of the court leaves a lot to be desired.

This comment will definitely affect your future life. Will you move the upper court to get this comment removed?

At the moment I am fighting for Binayak’s release. The case has been admitted for criminal appeal in the high court. If there is any justice left in India, the entire judgment including uncalled for remarks like this will be overturned through appeal.

In an interview given to an English newspaper you said you might seek political refuge somewhere outside India. Do you feel India is not a place for those who believe in democracy?

What I said was that I had a deep sense of insecurity and might be left with no choice but to seek asylum in a liberal democratic country. I have loved India deeply, and spent my entire working life here out of choice. Now the ultra nationalists are at my throat about my remark. I want to repeat that I do not need a certificate in patriotism from anyone. There is a definite decline in constitutional values in public life – I do not want to leave India. I always feel uncomfortable when I am in foreign streets. At the same time, I do not want to be another martyr, another reluctant heroine. If I have to leave for survival, I will.

What are you planning to do now?

Fight the case, try to stay alive, try to maintain hope that I will live again with Binayak in my lifetime. ⊕ M Suchitra 14 February 2011

The author is an independent journalist with The Quest Features and Footage, Kochi. • Write to the author • Human Rights • Chhatisgarh • Reprint permissions

Posted in Democracy, Dissent, Forests, Freedom struggle, Human Rights, India, Maoist rebellion, Urgent Action | Leave a comment

Delirious Joy in Bahrain

Posted on February 19, 2011 by editor

By NICHOLAS KRISTOF, NEW YORK TIMES, FEBRUARY 19, 2011, 11:21 AM

BAHRAIN — There’s delirious joy in the center of Bahrain right now. People power has prevailed, at least temporarily, over a regime that repeatedly used deadly force to try to crush a democracy movement. Pro-democracy protesters have retaken the Pearl Roundabout – the local version of Tahrir Square – from the government. On a spot where blood was shed several days ago there are now vast throngs kissing the earth, chanting slogans, cheering, honking and celebrating. People handed me flowers and the most common quotation I heard was: “It’s unbelievable!”

When protesters announced that they were going to try to march on the Pearl Roundabout this afternoon, I had a terrible feeling. King Hamad of Bahrain has repeatedly shown he is willing to use brutal force to crush protesters, including live fire just yesterday on unarmed, peaceful protesters who were given no warning. I worried the same thing would happen today. I felt sick as I saw the first group cross into the circle.

But, perhaps on orders of the crown prince, the army troops had been withdrawn, and the police were more restrained today. Police fired many rounds of tear gas on the south side of the roundabout to keep protesters away, but that didn’t work and the police eventually fled. People began pouring into the roundabout from every direction, some even bringing their children and celebrating with an almost indescribable joy. It’s amazing to see a site of such tragedy a few days ago become a center of jubilation right now. It’s like a huge party. I asked one businessman, Yasser, how he was feeling, and he stretched out his arms and screamed: “GREAT!!!!”

Many here tell me that this is a turning point, and that democracy will now come to Bahrain – in the form of a constitutional monarchy in which the king reigns but does not rule – and eventually to the rest of the Gulf and Arab world as well. But some people are still very, very wary and fear that the government will again send in troops to reclaim the roundabout. I just don’t know what will happen, and it’s certainly not over yet. But it does feel as if this just might be a milestone on the road to Arab democracy.

For King Hamad, who has presided over torture, gerrymandering and lately the violent repression of his own people, I don’t know what will happen. Like Hosni Mubarak, he could have worked out a deal for democracy if he had initiated it, but he then lost his credibility when he decided to kill his own citizens. Some people on the roundabout were chanting “Down with the Regime,” and they have different views about what precisely that means. Some would allow the king to remain in a largely figurehead role, while others want King Hamad out.

A democratic Bahrain will also put pressure on Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Arab countries. Saudi Arabia has been notoriously repressive toward the Shiite population in its eastern region, and the racist contempt among some Sunnis in the Gulf toward Shiites is breathtaking. If Shiites come to rule the banking capital of the region (as well, now, as Iraq), that will help change the dynamic.

We don’t know what exactly President Obama said to the king in his call last night, but we do know that the White House was talking about suspending military licensing to Bahrain. This may have been a case where American pressure helped avert a tragedy and aligned us with people power in a way that in the long run will be good for Bahrain and America alike.

Americans will worry about what comes next, if people power does prevail, partly because Gulf rulers have been whispering warnings about Iranian-influence and Islamists taking over. Look, democracy is messy. But there’s no hint of anti-Americanism out there, and people treated American journalists as heroes because we reflect values of a free press that they aspire to achieve for their country. And at the end of the day, we need to stand with democracy rather than autocracy if we want to be on the right side of history.

Finally, I just have to say: These Bahraini democracy activists are unbelievably courageous. I’ve been taken aback by their determination and bravery. They faced down tanks and soldiers, withstood beatings and bullets, and if they achieve democracy – boy, they deserve it.

Posted in Democracy, Freedom struggle, Middle East | Leave a comment

Bravo Egypt!

Posted on February 12, 2011 by editor

Posted in Democracy, Egypt, Freedom struggle, Human Rights, Middle East | Leave a comment

Mubarak’s Egypt NO MORE, by Sandmonkey

Posted on February 12, 2011 by editor
RANTINGS OF A SANDMONKEY, FEBRUARY 11, 2010

Today, the people were more resolved than ever to get rid of Hosny Mubarak, especially after last night’s provocative statement. I went to the presidential palaces alongside thousands of Egyptians and we surrounded it completely. Within a couple of hours we received the news: MUBARAK HAD ABDICATED!

Now, mind you, he didn’t really abdicate..the army overthrew him. That’s why we only had Omar Suleiman letting us know this. But it doesn’t matter. We will get all the money they stole and use it to rebuild the country.

Tonight will be the first night where I go to bed and don’t have to worry about state security hunting me down, or about government goons sent to kidnap me; or about government sponsored hackers attacking my website. Tonight, for the first time ever, I feel free…and it is awesome!

Save any and all disagreements with any of the groups that operate them. We will disagree with each other, and that will be sweet because no more dictatorship. Tomorrow we squabble,and…tonite?

TONIGHT WE CELEBRATE!

FUCK OFF MUBARAK..I HOPE YOU BURN IN HELL!

Posted in Conflict, Democracy, Dissent, Egypt, Freedom struggle, Middle East | Leave a comment