> > Stalinists Turn Market Savvy, Observe Human Rights Day by Fighting for > > Neoliberal Policies > > > > (Statement of the West Bengal Committee, Inquilabi Communist Sangathan, > > Indian Section of the Fourth International) > > > > On 10th December, 2002, on the day observed annually as Human Rights Day, > > police in Calcutta unleashed brutality on shanty dwellers in the Beliaghata > > Canal area. A large number of people were evicted from the only homes they > > had ever known, for the crime of being "illegal squatters", in a country > > where a huge number of people live below the poverty line and where the > idea > > of a room of one's own is a mere dream for most men and women. Protesters > > were dispersed by a massive show of force, and over a hundred were > arrested, > > including Sujato Bhadra, former General Secretary of the Association for > the > > Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal, Shaktiman Ghosh of the > Hawkers > > Sangram Committee, and Pranab Bandyopadhyay, veteran Gandhian and local > > community activist. Subsequently, the shanties were set on fire. > > > > For the last half a decade, the neoliberal turn of the ruling combine in > West > > Bengal, the Left Front, has been steadily deepening. They have not given up > > their authoritarian mould learnt from Stalin (the CPI( M), the major > > partner, remains one of the world's most fervent admirers of Stalin, going > > to the extent of defending the mass murders of the 1930s), while adding to > > it a sustained commitment to neoliberalism. As, for them, a top-down > > bureaucratic control had been synonymous with socialism, the failure of > that > > bureaucratic dictatorship compelled these rudderless leftists to an open > > accommodation with the most acute capitalist counter-offensive. West Bengal > > Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee explained that his party was opposed > > to globalisation only insofar as a handful of countries benefited from it. > > So as long as the capitalists of India also make a killing, it is good. > > > > However, the left front has a distinct vote bank, and therefore requires a > > different discourse. It has to proclaim that all its policies are for the > > majority. It boasts that it has a government of a different kind. It even > > claims that it is opposed to unwarranted evictions of toiling people, and > > asks people to remember how Sanjay Gandhi and Jagmohan had evicted people > > from the Turkoman Gate area during the Emergency of 1975-77. Since a series > > of its own measures nowadays are palpably anti-poor, anti-working class, it > > needs redefining what being for the people means. Development is the key > > word. In the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, development used to mean creation of > > new jobs, setting up new schools, public health care systems, and so on. > > Now, the word has been entirely emptied of the old meanings in even the > most > > reformist and moderate forms. What does the improved Left Front mean by > > development? When pavement hawkers were removed, with payloaders smashing > > their stalls and the cops seizing their goods, a government utterly > > incapable of providing jobs to people, declared that urban development and > > beautification was the goal. The meaning became clear soon enough. In order > > to enable motor manufacturers to sell more cars, shiny new flyovers, built > > with money loaned by Japanese and other funding agencies, started coming > up. > > At the same time, tram services were reduced, and kept in archaic forms of > > the pre-independence era rather than being modernised. This, despite the > > evidence that they provide a cheap and environmentally safe mass transport > > alternative, and that increasingly they have become important across > Europe. > > In fact, it is part of the acceptance of the globalisation agenda, that > > instead of improving public transport systems, the government has gone in a > > big way for the development of conditions facilitating the sale of more and > > more cars. > > > > The partially successful eviction of hawkers was followed by yet another > > development discourse - this time targeting shanty dwellers along some 11 > > canals in and around Calcutta. The first attack in 2001 threw out settlers > > along the Tolly Nullah. Special forces, called the Rapid Action Force, > > ostensibly created to deal with terrorists, were deployed and the people > > were brutalized. Their shanties were ransacked, they were herded out at gun > > point, often their goods were thrown away. A year later, a People's > > Commission On Eviction and Displacement, set up by a group of concerned > > citizens, heard about the evictions and issued its Interim Report. The > > Commission consisted of Justice R. Sachar (retired) Chairman, Justice Moloy > > Sengupta (retired), eminent civil engineer Pijush Som, activists like Dunu > > Roy, Maitreyi Chatterjee, Samar Bagchi, Sanjay Parikh, Colin Gonzalves and > > Monideep Chatterjee. The Commission report stated that: "In all the cases > > investigated, the commission found that it was the poorest of the poor who > > were the victims of demolition/displacement. The commission was shocked to > > find the residents of the rail bridge at Tollygunge living under railway > > platform, in extremely inhuman conditions like rats in their holes, with > the > > fear of being crushed by a train at any time. They have been living > > animal-like existence for decades, it is extremely distressing that the > > government has not paid any attention to their pitiable condition. > > Similarly, those at Beliaghata (canal side) were living in an area > > completely unfit for human habitation. Most of the persons evicted were > > either rickshaw pullers, domestic workers, casual labourers, tribals, > > fishermen, and self employed persons. A large number were scheduled caste > > and scheduled tribe. We found their family income before demolition very > > low, and most often, below the minimum wage. After demolition their > families > > shall become utterly destitute". > > > > Concerning the citizens' right to information, the Commission noted: > "Article > > 19(i)(a) of the constitution of India speaks of freedom of speech and > > expression. This has been interpreted to include the right to receive > > information - the right to know. And yet we have found not only in this > > case, but in all the cases of eviction and displacement, that as far as the > > government of West Bengal is concerned, they appear to have a right to hide > > the truth from the public. The West Bengal government officials appear to > go > > out of their way not only to keep all information relating to their > > development plans top secret, but in fact, they do worse, and deliberately > > mislead the public as to their intent. This point was forcefully stressed > by > > Mitul Dhar, one of the deponents before the commission." > > > > Concerning rehabilitation, the findings of the commission began with the > > damning indictment that: "The simple principle of rehabilitation which is > > required to be followed is: ensure requisite rehabilitation at the new > place > > before displacing a person and uprooting him from his traditional roots. > The > > people are questioning as to why the brunt of development is borne by the > > suffering displaced persons who are not benefited by such developmental > > activities. This commission therefore makes a strong appeal to the > > government to follow a policy on rehabilitation before displacing the > poor". > > > > The Commission also found that the use of force had been massive: "In all > > cases we found extreme force being used against the civilian population. In > > this respect, a comparison with the British police may be in order. There > is > > absolutely no attempt made to carry out the evictions with even a trace of > > humanity. It is obvious that in the contemplation of government, the poor > > figure lower in the ranking order than animals, and perhaps even lower than > > garbage. Bulldozers were invariably used, a large police force with lathis > > and guns were invariably on sight. The Rapid Action Force was used in the > > Tolly Nullah eviction. Lathi charges were common. The demolition of houses > > with people inside was reported. Eviction at gun point was reported." > > > > These were some of the interim recommendations of the Commission: > > 1. The persons proposed to be evicted should be given full information and > > consulted well in advance in respect of whether the eviction is necessary > at > > all, and if necessary the framing of the rehabilitation scheme necessary > and > > the manner and mode of shifting. > > 2. Resettlement is a result of development projects. These development > > projects, as well as the rehabilitation schemes, must flow from the right > to > > life and livelihood. > > 3. In all cases, it should be the responsibility of the state not to shift > > people and, as far as possible, to integrate peoples' housing in the very > > place where they are staying according to a scheme. > > 4. In cases where it is unavoidable that people be shifted, the new site > > ought to be as close as possible to the original site. Adequate time should > > be given for a transition to the new site. The entire scheme should be > > planned in consultation with the people. Adequate finance should be made > > available including finances for shifting people and the cost of > > construction. > > 5. In no circumstances should the shifting be done in bad weather. > > 6. The state should avoid in all cases, the use of force. This is > > unacceptable in a democratic state. > > 7. Refugees living in the country for decades have to be treated like human > > beings and be rehabilitated in a humanitarian manner. > > Quite clearly, Minister for Urban Development Ashok Bhattacharyya and his > > boss, the patron of arts, Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, found this a joke. So > > flagrantly violating all norms of humane behaviour, ignoring the UN > > Commission on Human Rights, 54th Conference principles, as well as the > > "National Policy On Resettlement And Rehabilitation," 1998, they have > > proceeded to evict more people without any alternatives being provided. > They > > have denied that the government has any duty whatsoever to provide for any > > living space for these people, since they are illegal occupants. The > > aforementioned Commission recorded one public official as stating that > there > > is no relationship between development and human rights. And how can > illegal > > occupants claim human rights. This is not, then, too far away from European > > regimes claiming that "illegal entrants" to Fortress Europe cannot claim > any > > human rights. Possibly, their first illegality was to be born at all, since > > they cannot afford to live in the Brave New World of privatization, > > increasingly expensive housing and transportation, to say nothing of food > > costs, being brokered by Bhattacharjee as the way to development. > > > > It was symbolic, that the Left Front Government chose 10th December as the > > latest date. It sent out a message that the squatters and such other people > > do not merit human treatment. It is for the oppressed to draw the necessary > > conclusions. Once again, many had hoped that the government would relent > and > > either provide alternative space, or stop the eviction. Others had placed > > their hopes on the Trinamool Congress of Ms. Mamata Bandyopadhyay, or on > > lesser Left Front parties like the Forward Bloc, CPI and the RSP. They must > > now recognize that in fact, none of these parties will really fight. In a > > political system where parties contest for votes, it is important for Ms. > > Banerjee to show an apparent pro-poor stance while she is out of power. But > > she will not fight. She was conveniently in a hospital, and the rest of her > > party was marked by its absence. Indeed, the Mayor of the Kolkata Municipal > > Corporation is a leader of her party and he has strongly supported the > > evictions. As for the FB, CPI and the RSP, while they were concerned with > > their local bases, they are even more concerned with their ministerial > > berths. They know quite well that none of their parties are going to wage a > > fight for a break with capitalism, so why risk cabinet berths for issues > > where the mind of capital is clearly made up? The only way ahead is to > build > > organizations of the different oppressed groups, and to begin the process > of > > linking these up, as well as to fight within the organized labour movement > > for a turn to active solidarity with all such marginalized groups of > people. > > > > * Stop all further evictions. > > * Immediate rehabilitation as well as payment of compensation to all the > > evicted people without looking at issues of whether they were "legal" > > squatters. > > * Resist neoliberal globalisation. > > * Oppose capitalism and all parties serving the capitalist class. > > * Build organizations of the oppressed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Leninist-International mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
