The Andhra Pradesh Government found itself in a cleft stick on its claim before the Supreme Court about the presence of Maoists on the Osmania University campus, which had become an epicenter of the ongoing movement for a separate Telangana.
Having come under flak for the deployment of paramilitary forces on the campus, both in the High Court as well as the apex court, the government sought to justify its action citing infiltration of Maoists but was caught in a quandary with the Supreme Court seeking evidence of the same.There was more than one reason for the government’s weak defence, a) none other than Tirupati Rao, Vice-Chancellor of the Osmania University, had himself denied Maoist presence on the campus; b) The Maoist-sponsored Telangana bandh on January 2 was an utter failure while similar calls by the students and political parties evoked total response; c) extremist violence in 2008 and 2009 had been the least in the state since the emergence of the CPI–ML and the Maoist group itself had admitted having lost its base in Telangana; d) in the past three months, neither had there been any evidence of the arrest of any Maoist nor any student had been caught with any weapon; e) on various occasions, the state government had claimed that the Maoist presence in the state, Telangana in particular, was negligible and, in fact, Delhi had started citing Andhra Pradesh as a model for other states in checking Naxal activity.The government, it appears, was preparing to highlight the statements issued by some Maoist leaders in support of Telangana as a pointer to their active participation in the movement but whether it will cut ice with the judiciary remains to be seen.The matter will come up for hearing on Friday. In fact, a section of the police officers were of the view that the government was playing with fire by using unwarranted force on students taking out peaceful rallies on the campus, creating further unrest among a section that was already frustrated for a variety of reasons.In the long run, this approach might prove counter-productive too, one of them reasoned.He is not off the mark.This was precisely what had happened in the late 60s when the then government crushed the separate Telangana movement with brute force, a process which saw the death of more than 300 students in firing or lathicharge. The frustration caused by the deaths resulted in substantial recruitment into the Naxalite movement and a majority of the current top ranking Maoist leaders are those who joined it in the early and mid 70s.While a majority were from the upper classes then, the students, who are bearing the brunt of the police force now, are mostly from the backward classes and the Dalits clamouring for a rightful share in the socio-economic structure.
Showing posts with label OU Student. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OU Student. Show all posts
Friday, February 26, 2010
SC rejects AP’s proof on Maoists in Osmania
(Courtesy : http://www.deccanchronicle.com/hyderabad/sc-rejects-ap%E2%80%99s-proof-maoists-osmania-737)
The secret evidence about the “presence” of Maoists in the Osmania University did not impress the Supreme Court much when it was presented before a division Bench here on Friday. After rejecting the claims, the apex court sought an explanation from the state government why Greyhounds, the anti-naxal elite force, was deployed on the campus.
The case was heard by a Bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly. Justice Singhvi said, “There are certain inputs that there are some sympathisers (of Maoists). Mere sympathy with X,Y,Z or some other persons will not make them criminals?”
Taking strong exception to the deployment of Greyhounds to deal with the agitation by the pro-Telangana students, Justice Singhvi asked the state government counsel, Mr Mukul Rohtagi, “If you say Greyhounds are deployed in this situation, will you deploy them when there is a political agitation?”
“The students were holding meetings there and expressing their views on an issue, you can’t prevent anyone from expressing their views,” the apex court observed.
The state’s lawyer acknowledged that the deployment of Greyhounds was not a wise decision and said the elite force had already been withdrawn.
But the court was not satisfied with a mere assurance by the state’s counsel and directed it to file an affidavit explaining the reasons why the anti-naxal force was at all sent inside the university.
Posting further hearing in the case to March 19, the court directed the government to submit its affidavit by March 9 and directed the three-member panel comprising home secretary, the Hyderabad police commissioner and the OU VC, to submit a status report on the situation in “sealed cover” by March 12.
The court, however, said that the state would be free to deploy its police force in the campus as per the requirement to maintain the law and order and ensure smooth conduct the exams.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
OU JAC to ignore Srikrishna panel, appeals against T-suicide
Hours before arrival of Justice Srikrishna Committee member-Secretary V K Duggal on a preliminary rendezvous, the Joint Action Committee of the
Instead, they decided to enlarge its ''peaceful movement'' beyond the university campus to take it into the remotest
The OU JAC, at its meeting in front of the
At the political level, the OU JAC announced that it would work right from the villages in the Telangana region and mount pressure on those Telangana legislators, who had not submitted their resignations so far.
Even while discounting reports that OU JAC would convert into a political party on the lines of Navnirman Samithi in Gujarat and All Assam Students Union (AASU) in
Monday, January 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
