Nearly 11 Years After Rationalist Dabholkar was Shot Dead in Pune, 2 Get Life Imprisonment 

Narendra Dabholkar’s killing in cold blood on the morning of August 20, 2013, when he was out on a morning walk in Pune had shocked and shattered the country. The first of four rationalist murders planned and execusted by the ultra right wing, Sanatan Sanstha, Dabholkar, a keen crusader and leader of the anti-sperstition movement in Maharashtra fell victim to four rounds that were fired at him at close range. Two bullets hit his head while one hit his chest, killing him instantly. A probe by the CBI revealed that his murder was planned by a Hindu group called Sanatan Sanstha.

Newsclick Report | 10 MAY 2024

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

The founder of Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti was gunned down by two bike-borne men linked with Hindu radical outfit, Sanatan Sanstha.

New Delhi: Close to 11 years after rationalist Narendra Dabholkar, 67. was gunned down in broad daylight in Pune by two persons with alleged links with Goa-based Hindu radical outfit, Sanatan Sanstha, a special court in Pune convicted two alleged assailants, Sachin Andure and Sharad Kalaskar, to life imprisonment on Friday. The other three accused were set free due to lack of evidence.

According to an Indian Express report, “the court acquitted ENT surgeon Dr Virendrasinh Tawade, a Mumbai-based lawyer Sanjeev Punalekar and his aide Vikram Bhave for the lack of evidence.” Tawade was the alleged mastermind of the killing.

Dabholkar, founder of the Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti, was shot dead by two bike-borne while on a morning walk in Pune on August 20, 2013. He was a part of the movement for developing scientific temper and reason, which posed a firm challenge to the narratives being peddled by the current regime. All his life, he fought against and raised awareness against superstition and black magic, caste-based division and fanaticism.

Dhabolkar’s murder was not an isolated incident. Communist leader Govind Pansare was killed in Kolhapur in 2015, author MM Kalburgi in Dharwad, Karnataka in 2015 and journalist Gauri Lankesh in Bengaluru in 2017 were assassinated, soon after, for similar reasons. All the targeted killing had led to widespread outrage.

According to an earlier report by news agency PTI, the High Court has been monitoring the probe since 2014 after which it was handed over to the CBI, with the agency submitting periodical reports to the court.

After the HC said last year that no further monitoring was required in the probe and disposed of the petition filed by Dabholkar's daughter, Mukta Dabholkar, seeking that the court continue monitoring of the case

It was the CBI that had charge-sheeted five accused in the case.

As per the Indian Express report, the special court in Pune had on September 15, 2021 framed charges against five accused, marking the beginning of the trial.

“All the five accused had pleaded not guilty to charges against them. While Tawade, Andure and Kalaskar are currently in prison, Bhave and Punalekar have been out on bail”, said the report.

Incidentally, in 2019, a NDTV report said that in a “chilling” 14-page-confession, Kalaskar had admitted to being linked to two other murders –- that of Pansare and Lankesh.

He also admitted to having shot twice at Dabholkar, in a 14-page confession statement to the Karnataka Police, as per the then NDTV report.

Murder of a Rationalist: Pune Court Slams Bid to ‘Finish Off Dabholkar’s Ideology’

Sabrang India | 16 May 2024

• 
  
• 
  

Close to 11 years after anti-superstition activist and crusader Dabholkar was shot dead in cold blood during a morning walk, a Pune court has flagged serious lapses in the probe conducted by the Maharashtra police and the CBI.

Over a decade after the tragic murder of rationalist Narendra Achyut Dabholkar, a special CBI Court in Pune on May 10 sentenced his assailants Sachin Prakashrao Andure and Sharad Bhausaheb Kalaskar to life imprisonment for murder. A fine of ₹5 lakh was also imposed.  The court however, acquitted three other accused — alleged mastermind Virendrasinh Sharadchandra Tawade, lawyer Sanjeev Punalekar and his assistant Vinay Bhave due to the failure of both the Maharashtra police and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to procure sufficient evidence.

Harsh words and comments on the conduct of the probe by India’s prime investigative agency, the CBI can be found in the 171 page judgement. While castigating the approach of the defence that has brazenly attempted to justify the killing labelling him “anti-Hindu”, the Court recognised the “pre-planning” behind the daylight assassination by “masterminds.” “Unfotunately,” however, states the court, “the prosecution has failed to unmask those master minds. “An overall shoddy and lackadaisical approach on the evidence gathering by the CBI, including the failure to establish the veracity of the confessional statement of Sharad Kalaskar recorded under the KCOC Act, ensured that such evidence could not be considered.”

“In the present case, the CBI ought to have carried out detailed investigation in that angle… The main master mind behind the crime is someone else. Pune police as well as CBI has failed to unearth those master minds. They have to introspect whether it is their failure or deliberate inaction on their part due to influence by any person in powers.” [Para 108, Page 160]

Sessions Judge Prabhakar P. Jadhav therefore concluded that that while the two convicts executed the murder, “the main mastermind behind the crime is someone else”. The two convicts hail from Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar (then called Aurangabad district) in Maharashtra. Andure worked as an accountant in a private shop and Kalaskar was a farmer.

The 69-year-old Dabholkar was shot dead on August 20, 2013, by two motorcycle-borne assailants on the Omkareshwar bridge near Pune’s Shanivar Peth area when he was out on a morning walk. Dabholkar’s murder along with three other similar murder cases — that of veteran communist leader and trade unionist, Govind Pansare (February 2015), cholar of Kannada, MM Kalburgi (August 2015) and Bengauluru based journalist, Gauri Lankesh(September 2017) had sparked prrotest and national outrage against the targeting of critics of Hindutva and campaigners against superstition and orthodoxy. Activists and stakeholders over the years have demanded a probe into the possibility of a common conspiracy on the ground that the pattern of execution of the killings were similar.

The judgement is a slight setback to the conclusion of investigators in Maharashtra and Karnataka that a right-wing organisation called Sanatan Sanstha was commonly behind the heinous murder of ideological adversaries between 2013 and 2017, although the question is still alive in three other ongoing murder trials.

Virendrasinh Tawde, an otolaryngologist associated with the Sanstha’s activities, is the one acquitted of the conspiracy charge. He was an aggressive opponent of Dabholkar and his Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti Maharashtra, an organisation campaigning against superstitions. Despite the court finding that Sachin Andure and Sharad Kalaskar, young men associated with the Sanstha, were the ones who shot dead the 69-year-old Dabholkar in Pune, it criticised the failure to “unmask the masterminds”. This meant that the role of the Sanatan Sanstha is yet to be legally established in this case, although the court has noted the manner in which the defence lawyers sought to tarnish the image of Dabholkar and his activities.

Additional Sessions Judge P.P. Yadav’s 171-page judgment points out that the existence of a motive will be insufficient to prove a conspiracy, and that reliable and direct evidence is required to show that the accused had acted on the motive. However, the judge does find it strange that the defence was seeking to establish during cross-examination of witnesses that the victim was “anti-Hindu”.

The Sanatan Sanstha’s role, according to investigators in Maharashtra and Karnataka, was seen in the murders of Govind Pansare, a leftist leader at Kolhapur in Maharashtra (2015), academician M.M. Kalburgi (Dharwad, 2015) and journalist Gauri Lankesh (Bengaluru, 2017).

In fact, it was a ballistics analysis of the gun used to kill Lankesh – by the SIT appointed by the Karnataka government – that disclosed that it was the same weapon used in the murder of Kalburgi. Several common features in the four murders have so far been unearthed, leading the police to conclude that a single syndicate has been active in seeking to eliminate adversaries. The governments in Maharashtra and Karnataka must show greater political will in combating such threats to independent thinkers and activists.

Narendra Dabholkar a crusader leader and activist

Dabholkar was a physician, activist, rationalist and author based in Maharashtra. He founded the Committee for the Eradication of Blind Faith (Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti, or MANS) after leaving his decade-long medical practice. He was also the editor of the weekly Marathi magazine Sadhana which championed liberal thought and scientific temperament. As a prominent crusader against religious superstitions, he was highly critical of godmen who promised “miracle cures” to ailments.

Dabholkar also spent decades advocating for a law to ban fraudulent and exploitative superstitious practices and played a crucial role in drafting the Andhashraddha Nirmulan Bill, 2005 (Anti-Superstition Bill) which was pending before the Maharashtra legislature at the time of his death. This law was opposed by various organisations and political parties for being “anti-Hindu”. In a twist of welcome irony, it was finally passed as an ordinance on August 24, 2013 — days after Dabholkar’s death. In December of that year, the State legislature passed the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifive and Other Inhuman, evil and Abhorrent Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013.

The investigation and case

Over the past decade, various investigating agencies have handled the case starting from the Pune police to the Maharashtra Anti Terrorism Squad (ATS). In 2014, the CBI took over the case following a Bombay High Court direction. The next year, the High Court began monitoring the probe after  members of Dabholkar’s family complained that there that there had been no progress in the investigation. It was only last year that the Court  decided to discontinue monitoring after expressing some satisfaction with the way the trial was progressing. of the trial.

On Friday, May 10, Sachin Prakashrao Andure and Sharad Bhausaheb Kalaskar were convicted under Sections 302 (murder) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), along with charges under the Indian Arms Act, 1959. However, the rest of the three accused were acquitted of charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) and Section 120B of the IPC (criminal conspiracy).

During the proceedings, the prosecution examined 20 witnesses which included various close associates of the Sanatan Sanstha, an extreme right-wing Hindu organisation which had expressed strong opposition to the 2005 Anti-Superstition Bill spearheaded by Dabholkar. The Court identified this enmity as the primary motive for the murder. Other witnesses included Dabholkar’s son Hamid and activists from the Maharashtra Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti.

The first accused in the case, ENT surgeon Virendrasinh Tawde, was arrested in June 2016 with the CBI claiming that he was a coordinator for Sanatan Sanstha in Kolhapur and had personal differences with Dabholkar. Before his arrest in this case, Tawade had also been arrested by the Maharashtra police for the murder of CPI leader, Govind Pansare. The CBI charge sheet stated that he was the “mastermind” of the conspiracy to commit the murder.

The two convicted assailants — Andure and Kalaskar were arrested only in 2018 when their role in the murder of Gauri Lankesh came up. The ATS apprehended the duo with the help of Karnataka Police’s Special Investigation Team (SIT). They were subsequently named in a supplementary charge sheet filed in February 2019. Eventually, in May 2019, Mumbai-based lawyer Sanjeev Punalekar was arrested along with his close aide Vikram Bhave who was earlier convicted for his role in the 2008 Gadkari Rangayatan Theatre bomb blast in Thane. All the accused were allegedly linked to the Sanatan Sanstha.

According to the CBI, Bhave reportedly participated in a recce along with Andure and Kalaskar about 15 days before the murder. In its charge sheet, the agency claimed that Punalekar had advised Kalaskar to destroy the firearms used in multiple murders – including that of Dabholkar and Gauri Lankesh. On Punalekar’s instructions, Kalaskar had allegedly thrown four country-made pistols into a creek near Thane on July 7, 2018. However, the agency later told the trial Court that efforts to recover the murder weapon had been unsuccessful!

It was on September 15, 2021 that charges were framed against the five accused by the special CBI Court marking the beginning of the trial.

The verdict

In its detailed 171 page judgement the Court has called out the CBI for a failure to investigate thoroughly, a lackadaisical approach to the gathered evidence, ensuring that the “masterminds” are not nabbed and that conspiracy is not proven. “The murder is committed with very well-prepared plan, which is executed by accused Nos. 2 (Andure) and 3 (Kalaskar). Considering the economic and social status of the accused Nos. 2 and 3, they are not the masterminds of the crime. The main mastermind behind the crime is someone else. Pune police as well as CBI has failed to unearth those master minds. They have to introspect whether it is their failure or deliberate inaction on their part due to influence by any person in powers”, it underscored.

Emphasising further that Tawade, Punalekar and Bhave were being acquitted only due to the shoddy investigation conducted by the CBI, the Court observed — “There is evidence of motive for murder of Dr Narendra Dabholkar against accused No.1 Dr Virndrasinh Tawde. There is reasonable suspicion against accused No. 4. Sanjiv Punalekar and accused No.5. Vikram Bhave, showing their involvement in the present crime. However, the prosecution has failed to establish the involvement of accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5 by leading reliable evidence to convert motive and suspicion into the form of evidence showing their involvement in the crime.” Accordingly, terror charges under Section 16 of the UAPA and charges of criminal conspiracy were dropped against the three accused.

The Court also criticised the Maharashtra state authorities for procedural lapses in obtaining appropriate sanction orders for the prosecution of the acquitted accused under the UAPA. The Rules prescribed for the law mandate that the competent authority must submit its recommendation for sanction to the Central or State Government within seven working days of receiving evidence gathered by the investigating officer. However, during the proceedings, it was revealed that Shirish Nagorao Mohod, then Deputy Secretary and Sanjay Kumar Shyamkishor Prasad, then Additional Chief Secretary of the Mumbai Home Department had failed to process the sanction orders on time. [Paras 65-66, Pages 115-116]

“Considering the status of deceased this case is of national importance. Despite the said fact, casual and negligent approach of PW15 (Shirish Nagorao Mohod) and PW19 (Sanjay Kumar Shyamkishor Prasad), is not only shocking but requires condemnation. It shows that even through this case is of national importance, officers on high posts PW15 and PW19 have not shown utmost care and caution expected from them.”State of Maharashtra v. Virendrasinh Tawde and Ors (2024)Sessions Case No.706/2016

“Present case is very serious and is of national importance. Not only, Dr. Narendra Dabholkar is assassinated but an attempt is made to finish his ideology”, judge Jadhav critically noted. He also implicated Sanatan Sanstha and its affiliates—Hindu Janjagruti Samiti, Warkari Sampraday, and others for “nurturing bitter enmity against” the rationalist. [Para 72, Page 125]

The Court also expressed serious reservations over the conduct of defence counsels during the proceedings. It pointed out how attempts were made to imply that Dabholkar was “hated” because he had “insulted Hindu gods”. Calling this approach “very strange and is condemnable”, the Court further highlighted, “The charge sheeted accused and defence counsels have not merely attempted to raise the defence. From unnecessary and irrelevant lengthy cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and even in final argument, an attempt is made to tarnish image of the deceased. At the same time, the approach of the defence was to justify the killing of the deceased Dr. Narendra Dabholkar, by labelling him as anti-Hindu.”

After perusing the testimonies of eyewitnesses, the Court concluded that Andure and Kalaskar had indeed shot Dabholkar dead.

The battle for justice continues

Speaking to the media the day of the judgement, son and daughter of Dabholkar, Hamid and Mukta, stated that the conviction of Andure and Kalaskar had reaffirmed their faith in the judiciary but they intended to appeal against the acquittals of the other five accused.

“We are satisfied that the two accused have been convicted and sentenced to life, but the masterminds also need to be punished. We are determined to pursue justice and take the case to the Supreme Court. The charge sheets, including those related to murders of Govind Pansare, M.M. Kalburgi, and Gauri Lankesh reveal alarming connections, indicating a broader conspiracy spanning multiple cases. All the cases have a common thread, which is what investigation agencies have been saying. Until the conspirator in all these cases is apprehended, the safety of all rationalists remains in jeopardy.”

The judgement may be read here:

Courtesy: sabrang India

Liberalism in a Quandary

Prabhat Patnaik | 11 May 2024

The roots of the crisis of liberalism, as an alternative non-socialist path to human freedom, lie in the phenomenon of globalisation.

Each strand of political praxis is informed by a political philosophy which analyses the world around us, especially, in modern times, its economic characteristics. On the basis of this analysis, the particular political philosophy sets out the objectives which have to be struggled for, and the political praxis informed by it carries out this struggle.

The objective may be difficult to achieve, more difficult in certain contexts than in others, and this difficulty may act as a hurdle for political praxis; but this does not constitute a crisis for that political philosophy. The sheer difficulty of achieving an objective does not constitute a crisis. A crisis of a political philosophy arises when it has an internal contradiction, when the objective it puts forward is logically in conflict with some other feature in which it believes.

Many would argue that the objective of socialism that the political philosophy, Marxism, puts forward, has in the present context become somewhat more difficult to achieve. But this, while explaining the present weakening of the Left, does not constitute any crisis for Marxism.

The political philosophy called liberalism, however, is facing a crisis in the sense that the objective it puts forward for the achievement of what it perceives as human freedom, is logically impossible to achieve in a world which liberalism itself holds dear. In other words, there is a logical contradiction within itself which has arisen in the course of the development of the economy and to which it has no answer. The crisis that liberalism faces is of this nature.

Modern liberalism was developed in response to the Bolshevik Revolution during the capitalist crisis of the inter-war period, as a way of resolving that crisis, and other similar crises that could arise in future, without transcending capitalism. It believed that the combination of Western-style liberal democracy and capitalism tempered by State intervention, provided the best framework for achieving human freedom.

It believed that under the institutions of Western-style liberal democracy, the State, far from being a class State, would express social “rationality”, and would do so better than under any other institutional framework. Hence, such a liberal democratic State can intervene in the economy both to rectify any malfunctioning that may arise because of the spontaneous working of capitalism, and also to make this spontaneous working, even when it is not a case of malfunctioning, conform to the demands of social rationality.

This version of liberalism, in whose formation the English economist John Maynard Keynes had played a major role and which Keynes had called “new liberalism”, differed from earlier versions of liberalism in so far as those earlier versions had wanted State intervention to be kept to a minimum, in the erroneous belief, that had prevailed earlier, that the capitalist economy always operated at “full employment”.

This new version of liberalism, even if we do not go into its validity within the institutional framework it envisages (and it is utterly invalid, among other things, because of the phenomenon of imperialism which it does not even cognise), certainly ceases to be valid when capital, including finance, gets globalised. This is because we do not in this case have a nation-State presiding over capital that is essentially national, but a nation-State confronting globalised capital. And in any such confrontation, the nation-State must yield to the demands of globalised capital for fear of triggering a capital flight, which means, as even the most ardent “new liberal” would admit, that the State cannot possibly act as the embodiment of social rationality.

Put differently, the presumption behind “new liberalism” was that the domain over which the writ of the State ran and the domain over which the capital originating in that country operated, more or less coincided. This was, in fact, the case when Keynes was writing and even later. But with increasing globalisation of capital, this presumption loses its validity. And when this happens, then it is unreal even to pretend that the executive of the State would be goaded by public opinion to act in ways that it thinks are socially rational, irrespective of whether globalised capital concurs with such action.

The roots of the crisis of liberalism, therefore, lie in the phenomenon of globalisation; but this crisis clearly manifests itself in the period of crisis of neo-liberalism when large-scale mass unemployment appears on the scene, which was exactly what Keynes thought was the Achilles heel of capitalism that, unless overcome though State intervention, would make the system vulnerable to Bolshevik-style revolution.

The pursuit of Keynesian “demand management” that was supposed to overcome the crises of overproduction that plagued capitalism, requires that larger State expenditure, the panacea for the crisis, should be financed either by raising more taxes at the expense of the rich or by raising no extra taxes at all, that is, through a larger fiscal deficit: larger State expenditure financed by raising more tax revenue at the expense of the working people who consume much of their incomes anyway, would not add to aggregate demand and hence would not alleviate the crisis.

But these two ways of financing additional State expenditure, taxing the rich and increasing the fiscal deficit, are both opposed by globalised finance capital which, therefore, eliminates the scope for any fiscal intervention by the State against the crisis. It can, of course, intervene through monetary instruments but these, as is well-known, are extremely blunt, often encouraging inflation that compounds the crisis, rather than stimulating larger private spending.

Within neo-liberalism, therefore, there is no way of overcoming the crisis; Keynes’s “new liberalism” comes a cropper. The cul-de-sac or dead end of the neo-liberal economic regime, therefore, becomes a crisis for the political philosophy of liberalism.

This entry into the economic cul-de-sac can be illustrated with the example of Europe. Until the mid-seventies, the unemployment rate in European Union countries (15 members at the time) had been less than 3% for a long period. It started climbing in the late seventies and the eighties as globalisation proceeded, and has remained roughly above 7% on average since then, though with variations between countries; and State intervention has been unable to bring it down.

Since a single nation-State cannot intervene to boost aggregate demand and reduce unemployment when confronted with globalised capital, the country can either impose capital controls to get out of the vortex of globalised finance altogether, or have a co-ordinated fiscal stimulus along with other countries. In which case, capital’s tendency to fly out of any country that expands demand can be checked (since all countries would be following a similar policy of expanding State expenditure).

The first of these entails getting out of the neo-liberal regime: capital controls would also necessitate, sooner or later, trade controls, and this means that the basic character of a neo-liberal regime, namely relatively unrestricted flows of capital and goods and services, would be infringed. International finance capital will oppose this tooth and nail, so that such a course would require an alternative class mobilisation that cannot remain confined to a programme of preserving monopoly capitalism.

The second of these routes, if it is to be a genuinely coordinated fiscal stimulus across all countries, requires a degree of internationalism that capitalism, with its in-built tendency for dominating the periphery, is incapable of demonstrating. It can, therefore, at best introduce a coordinated fiscal stimulus within the metropolis even while imposing fiscal austerity on the periphery, which would mean a tightening of imperialism.

Capitalism may well try this, but such a tightening of imperialism cannot be acknowledged by liberalism as a feather in its cap; on the contrary, it would mean a defeat of liberalism as it presents itself, namely, as an alternative non-socialist path to human freedom.

It is this predicament of liberalism that constitutes its crisis. It cannot claim that freedom is possible within capitalism when there is large-scale unemployment which also keeps wages down, causing a general stagnation or worsening in the condition of labour. It cannot overcome this material reality without transcending neo-liberal capitalism, the requisite class alliance for which would carry the economy beyond capitalism itself. (The talk of retreating to a pre-neoliberal capitalism is analogous to the talk of returning to an always mythical ‘free competition capitalism’ as a means of doing away with the ills of monopoly capitalism, that Lenin had pilloried in his book Imperialism). Any acquiescence in a coordinated fiscal stimulus among metropolitan countries alone for reducing unemployment that leaves out the periphery from its ambit, amounts to a betrayal of what liberalism claims it stands for.

Classical liberalism had come to grief during the Great Depression. Keynesian, or new liberalism, has come to grief with the crisis of neo-liberalism. And there are no other versions of liberalism that are available, or even possible, which can take economies out of their current stagnation while keeping them confined to their capitalist integument.

Ecological Crisis and the Role of the Working Class

Rana Mitra | 01 May 2024


The agents of such a holistic revolution to save Mother Earth are not simply the working class in a traditional economic sense, but also the ‘ecological proletariat’, a dedicated army of an ecologically conscious working class.





“Give back the wilderness, take away the cities

Embrace if you will your steel, brick and stonewalls

O new-fangled civilisation! Cruel all-consuming one,

Return all sylvan, secluded, shaded and sacred spots

And traditions of innocence. Come back evenings

When herds returned suffused in evening light,

Serene hymns were sung, paddy accepted as alms

And bark-clothes worn. Rapt in devotion,

One meditated on eternal truths then single-mindedly.

No more stonehearted security or food fit for kings –

We’d rather breathe freely and discourse openly!

We’d rather get back the strength that we had,

Burst through all barriers that hem us in and feel

This boundless Universe’s pulsating heartbeat!”

— Rabindranath Tagore, “Sabhyatar Prati” (To Civilisation), Chaitali, 19 Chaitra, 1302 (Bengali calendar)

(Translated in Fakrul Alam and Radha Chakraborty edited The Essential Tagore, Kolkata, Visva-Bharati Edition, 2011)

This was the earnest appeal of Rabindranath Tagore to humanity to save civilisation from capitalist greed and stop the ruthless plunder of nature some 129 years ago.

Doubtlessly, the appeal was draped in a tinge of idealism, but it holds, in essence, humanity’s urge to go back to basics, where exploitation of men and nature, as it is witnessed now, was unthinkable in a somewhat primitive society (you can take it as symbolic of society in ‘primitive communism’ in the language of Marx).

Needless to say, we are now on the cusp of an environmental crisis of previously unheard-of magnitude due to the ever-insatiable greed of capitalists (more so in the current neo-liberal era) to exploit and plunder men and women’s labour power on one hand and natural resources on the other.

This mad rush is to create and then appropriate ‘surplus’ (read profit) of gigantic proportions.

This essentially results in colossal exploitation of labour, giving rise to inequality of wealth and income of gargantuan proportion, in the world in general and India in particular now, compared to any time in history.


We are now on the cusp of an environmental crisis of previously unheard-of magnitude due to the ever-insatiable greed of capitalists to exploit and plunder labour power on one hand and natural resources on the other.

This essentially creates a ‘metabolic rift’ (in the words of Marx), rocking harmonious metabolic interactions between humans and nature.
Metabolic rift: A centrality of Marxist understanding of ecology

There has been a growing body of research in the last few decades from leading social scientists, researchers and natural scientists, who now look to Karl Marx again to understand and decipher the central logic and code of destruction of nature by capitalists in diabolic tandem with the exploitation of labour in the neo-liberal era.

Hence, boundless, unsustainable exploitation of natural resources and exploitation of labour form a ‘coherent whole’ in the project of capitalism. There is an insatiable greed among capitalists for mammoth profits even if it means a bleak future for Mother Earth.

Fortunately, now these significant research outputs drive out a false belief, nurtured for long by anti-Marxists and some ‘Green’ activists alike, about Marx being only ‘Promethean’ in a sense that he was enamoured with capitalism’s almost limitless ability to increase output through technological upgradation boundlessly without a critique.

One of the reasons for such misinterpretation of Marx springs from the fact that Marx could not finish Capital in his lifetime. It is well known now that Marx eagerly studied natural sciences in his late years with broken health and facing untold economic and political sufferings.

Hence, he could not fully assimilate his new findings and research into Capital. Interestingly, he planned to elaborate and integrate his path-breaking theorisation on ecology in Volume III of Capital, especially in rewriting his theory of ground rent.

However, most unfortunately for humanity, he could never make it very far, as even Volume II of Capital was not published in his lifetime. However, it is a matter of great fortune for the entire body of human knowledge that Marx did leave a number of notebooks on natural sciences.

Unfortunately, no one paid any serious attention to these notebooks and they remained unpublished for a long time. But now Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe (MEGA) has published them and so have other research institutions worldwide.

We now know with fair details that Marx amply recognised the destructive power of capital and pointed out the disruptions in the universal metabolism of Nature that weaken material conditions for free and sustainable human development.


Boundless, unsustainable exploitation of natural resources and exploitation of labour form a ‘coherent whole’ in the project of capitalism.

Marx brilliantly analysed how the logic of capital, in quest of super-profit through over-exploitation of natural resources, disengages from the natural cycle.

This gives birth to various disharmonies in the metabolic interactions between humans and Nature. Marx specifically analysed this problem with reference to Justus von Liebig’s critique of modern robbery agriculture, known as Raubbau.

The analysis essentially zeroes in on a productive pattern of modern agriculture (now more so in the neo-liberal era under corporatisation of agriculture) that takes as much nutrition as possible from the soil without returning it.

Raubbau, as evident more so now, is driven purely by profit maximisation, which is totally out of sync with the material conditions of the soil for sustainable production.

This essentially gives rise to an unbridgeable hiatus between capital’s valorisation (increase in the value of capital assets through the application of value-forming labour in production) and Nature’s metabolism.

This is the precise reason for ‘metabolic rifts’ in mankind’s interactions with the environment. Interestingly enough, though Marx in Capital mainly reflected upon the problem of the metabolic rift in relation to soil degradation, it is nonetheless important and obligatory on our part to expand its scope and breadth to try to use it as an essential tool to analyse such rift in other spheres of capitalist production.

Marx himself had tried it successfully as a tool to analyse the ongoing environmental crisis in his late years, in studying deforestation and livestock farming.

This unique tool of metabolic rift has since been applied most successfully by experts such as Stefano B. Longo and Brett Clark on marine sociology, Ryan Gunderson on livestock agribusiness, Del Weston on climate change and above all by John Bellamy Foster applying tools of Marxist political economy in ecological problems.
Pioneering role of Soviet ecology: An almost forgotten chapter of history

Renowned Soviet scientists, geologists such as E.V. Shantser, Aleksei Petrovich Pavlov and many others like them made pioneering contributions to human ecology, especially in coining words such as ‘anthropocene’ or ‘anthropogene’ in 1922, much earlier than the development of such understanding in the realm of Western scientific community.

Aleksei Pavlov first used the word ‘anthropocene’ to refer to a new geological period in which mankind appeared as the main driver of planetary ecological change. Pavlov’s understanding was very closely connected with another landmark publication known as The Biosphere in 1926 by V.I. Vernadsky, which constituted an early proto-Earth system analysis that focused on the biogeochemical cycles of the planet.

Both Pavlov and Vernadsky strongly focused on the anthropogenic factors that had come to dominate the biosphere. All these path-breaking analyses of the Soviet scientists were based strictly on the dialectical materialist approach, which was initially spurned by the Western scientific community, barring some few notable exceptions such as John Desmond Bernal, J.B.S. Haldane, et al, who too based their scientific approach on the same foundational platform.

Most interestingly, Western science began to assimilate the concept of biosphere changes only in the early 1970s, in which decade appeared the Club of Rome’s famous study, known as, The Limits of Growth. This ultimately gave rise to Earth system science that extended beyond the concept of biosphere.


One of the reasons for such misinterpretation of Marx springs from the fact that Marx could not finish Capital in his lifetime.

Now, when we have crossed almost two and half decades of the twenty-first century, the new Earth system analysis is reflected more on the consequences of stepping out of ‘planetary boundaries’, mirrored through catastrophic climate changes, ozone layer depletion, ocean acidification, disruption of nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, disappearing ground cover that includes deforestation, diminishing freshwater supplies, etc.

In other words, these calamitous threats to the global environment are conceived in terms of crossing ‘planetary boundaries’, separating the Holocene Epoch in the geological time scale from Anthropocene Epoch.

On all these, the holistic approach of Soviet ecology had pioneered in not only the mitigation efforts but the connection of the anthropogenic problems with the overall capitalist mode of production much earlier than when the problems were even conceptualised by the Western scientific community.
The Great Stalin Plan for the transformation of nature

The principal Marxist understanding on which this great plan rested was known as “Zapovednik”, which quintessentially meant nature reserves for scientific research while expanding them further to protect the environment.

This was spawned especially in the aftermath of the mammoth destruction of men, materials and environment during the Second World War and gave rise in 1948 to the Great Stalin Plan for the transformation of nature.

This is one of the greatest efforts launched in human history to reverse anthropogenic regional climate change in deforested areas, with an emphasis on the promotion of watersheds.

As noted even by John Bellamy Foster (an otherwise strong critique of Stalin) in his seminal work, Capitalism in the Anthropocene, in 1936 itself, the Soviet government led by Stalin created the ‘main administration for forest protection and afforestation’, which established water protective forests in wide belts across the country.

While forests in parts of the Soviet Union were exploited for industrial use, the best old-growth forests of the Russian heartland were consciously protected with ecological concerns given priority.


Marx brilliantly analysed how the logic of capital, in quest of super-profit through over-exploitation of natural resources, disengages from the natural cycle.

This eventually created a total forest preserve of the size of France that grew over time to the size of Mexico, i.e., almost two-thirds of the total land mass of the United States of America. This plan also embodied six million hectares (15 million acres) of plantation of fresh forest that constituted the world’s first explicit attempt to reverse human-induced climate change.

However, after the death of Stalin, this plan was partly abandoned though more than a million hectares of trees had already been planted. Soviet ecology again revived its glorious tradition in the 1960s with the famous scientist, Budyko’s ‘Energy Balance Models’ that soon became the basis of all complex climate modeling.
Three contradictions of capitalism: Pushing the world to the brink of disaster

Leading Marxist ecological scholars such as James O’Connor and Costas Panayotakis have developed the second and third contradiction thesis of capitalism, particularly from an ecological standpoint, expanding from the first basic one conceptualised by Marx.

The first central contradiction of capitalism is between ‘forces’ and ‘relations’ of production, that is the driving force of history. This basic contradiction refers to the tendency of capitalist economic development to be interrupted by economic crises sprouting from the difficulty in realising ‘surplus value’ generated by capitalist exploitation of labour.

In sync with this, O’Connor developed the idea of the second contradiction from an ecological angle, which is developed between ‘capitalist production relations’ (and productive forces) and ‘conditions of capitalist production’.

Since the mid-1970s, there has been a perceptible scenario of the intermittent slow growth of worldwide market demand, despite the ascendency of neo-liberalism in the 1980s and 1990s as a response to capitalism’s failed attempt to sustain growth momentum due to over-exploitation of labour.

This has led capital to attempt to restore profit both by raising the rate of exploitation of labour while simultaneously depleting and exhausting natural resources beyond sustainable levels, and exponential growth of financialisation of the economy.

These desperate responses of capitalism to sustain profit rate aggravate further both the first and second contradictions, as intensified exploitation and growing inequalities (that have taken colossal proportions worldwide) reduce the final demand of consumer and other commodities.

This harming and over-exploitation of natural resources beyond sustainable levels will further reduce the ‘productivity of conditions of production’, thereby raising the average cost of production.

Ironically, finding no other avenue, capitalism tries to solve the puzzle of the first and second contradiction through technological innovation. The third contradiction of capitalism takes its root here.

As is evident, despite prodigious levels of growth of technology developed by capitalism, the system, especially in the neo-liberal era now, shows its inability to translate such development into a richer and more satisfying life for humanity at large.


Both Pavlov and Vernadsky strongly focused on the anthropogenic factors that had come to dominate the biosphere.

This has led many to conclude that this crisis of capitalism has not only an economic dimension, but it carries the baggage of the crisis of ‘legitimation dimension’ too.

This is particularly so as the gigantic strides in labour productivity in the last hundred years or so have failed to translate into shorter working hours, as aspired by the working class some 138 years ago in May, 1886 at HayMarket in Chicago.

This has a special meaning in killing even the creative cultural potential of the society as a whole, as the lack of quality leisure time faced by the working masses worldwide, increases their alienation eventually not only from the means of production but also from quality of cultural output.

They could no longer appreciate excellence of cultural output and become a connoisseur of them, as their shortened leisure time makes them a mechanical audience for cultural output requiring inferior mental faculty.
Climate crisis wow: A clear class bias mediated by global finance capital

As is evident from numerous studies in the last few decades, the global climate crisis, a function of capitalist greed for super-profit, is now fast running out of humanity’s control even when we have the technology and means to mitigate it, if not stamp it out altogether.

A recent study published in Nature on April 17, 2024 says the climate crisis could cost the global economy some US $38 trillion (1 trillion = 1 lakh crore) a year by 2050.

It could shrink the average global income by 19 percent in the next 26 years when compared to what it would have been without global heating caused primarily by the burning of fossil fuels.

This seminal research was carried out by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). This means that the costs of inaction have already exceeded the costs of limiting global heating to 20C by six times.

However, limiting warming to 20 C can still significantly reduce economic losses through 2100 CE.

Unlike previous studies, the research predicted economic losses for wealthier countries as well in the Global North, with the US and German economies shrinking by 11 percent by mid-century, France’s by 13 percent and the UK’s by 7 percent.

However, the countries set to suffer the most are countries closer to the equator that have lower incomes already and have historically done much less to contribute to the climate crisis. Iraq, for example, could see incomes drop by 30 percent, Botswana 25 percent and Brazil 21 percent.


While forests in parts of the Soviet Union were exploited for industrial use, the best old-growth forests of the Russian heartland were consciously protected with ecological concerns given priority.

“Our study highlights the considerable inequity of climate impacts: We find damages almost everywhere, but countries in the tropics will suffer the most because they are already warmer,” study co-author Anders Levermann, who leads Research Department Complexity Science at PIK, said in a statement.

“Further temperature increases will, therefore, be most harmful there. The countries least responsible for climate change are predicted to suffer income loss that is 60 percent greater than the higher-income countries and 40 percent greater than higher-emission countries. They are also the ones with the least resources to adapt to its impacts.”

This is especially noteworthy when viewed in the background of the global model of transnational banks’ financing behind fossil fuel production. As of 2022, the world’s 60 biggest banks poured over US $5.5 trillion over seven years into the fossil fuel industry, driving climate chaos and causing deadly local community impacts.

From 2016 (Paris Agreement) to 2022, among the top 12, known as the ‘Dirty Dozen’, JP Morgan Chase financing to the tune of US $434.1 billion, leading the pack of fossil fuel finance, followed by CITI at US $332.9 billion and Wells Fargo at US $316.7 billion, occupy the top three positions.


A recent study published in Nature on April 17, 2024 says the climate crisis could cost the global economy some US $38 trillion (1 trillion = 1 lakh crore) a year by 2050.

This has laid bare the deep interconnection between the global model of finance capital today and the financing pattern behind the climate crisis.
The way forward: Ushering in a new wave of eco-socialism

Writing in Socialism and Ecology in 1989, Paul Sweezy, the celebrated American Marxist and the former editor of Monthly Review, wrote that unless the planning system represented by socialist countries and (in many developing countries) are restored to their preeminent position by which societies could somehow preserve and adapt to serve the needs of new situations, and unless the potential of actually existing socialist societies operating, unlike capitalism, on other bases than simply the pursuit of economic riches, it might simply be too late for civilized humanity to restore the necessary conditions for its own survival.

In countries such as India, currently in the midst of the 18th Lok Sabha elections, we note with dismay the role played by the present dispensations at the Union level and in a few states, where dangerous steps have been initiated recently through amendments of many significant legislations to permit corporate loot of natural resources through bulldozing of legislations in the Parliament without proper debate, viz., Forest Conservation Amendment Bill, 2023, amendment to Biological Diversity Act, 2002.

This can hold a good lesson on the growing climate and ecological challenges faced by the masses. However, without mainstreaming the climate and ecological debates, and adopting a revolutionary approach to ecological challenges, mostly by the progressive, left forces, who are prepared to shun the neo-liberal path, this cannot be achieved.

We have to understand that the present set of the class struggle cannot be successful by simply floating an appeal on economic terms.


Many have concluded that this crisis of capitalism has not only an economic dimension, but it carries the baggage of the crisis of ‘legitimation dimension’ too.

It should increasingly encompass a coherent, harmonious approach even on ecological terms too, that mirrors the fact that it is the social metabolism between humanity and nature (with its all living and non-living elements) that constitutes the most important basis of human advancement through the ages.

The agents of such a holistic revolution to save Mother Earth are not simply the working class in a traditional economic sense, but also the ‘ecological proletariat’, a dedicated army of an ecologically conscious working class. The emancipation from the tyranny perpetrated by the twenty-first-century global finance capital lies in their hands.

Rana Mitra is General Secretary, All India National Bank For Agriculture And Rural Development [NABARD] Employees Association.

GREENWASHING

INDIA

Green Credit Rules – A Double Jeopardy for Forests

Tapan Mishra , D Raghunandan

 | 08 May 2024

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

It is clear that GCP is a money-spinning opportunity for corporates, who can add earnings through green credits to their usual earnings.

A Green Credit Programme (GCP) was notified by the ministry of environment, forests and climate change (MoEFCC) on October 12, 2023, covering a range of activities by corporates or other entities that would be eligible for “green credits.”

This came and came to the fore again recently when the first set of rules pertaining to one of the major activities covered, namely afforestation, were notified on February 26, 2024. This set off a storm of protests, including a public statement by over 500 people’s movements, civil society organisations, environmentalists and experts calling for a roll back of the rules and reassessment of the programme itself.

Recall that the GCP was conceived as a scheme under the overarching concept championed by the Prime Minister, called Lifestyle for Environment or LIFE, envisaged as a grassroots movement to protect and conserve the environment by adopting and encouraging actions that embrace these goals.

However, the draft of the scheme itself, as initially notified in June 2023 inviting public response, was aimed mostly at corporates, industries and similar entities, although details will only be known when the rules for each of the sectors covered are notified.

The idea was that “green credits” could be earned by engaging in activities that promote environmental conservation, improvement and sustainability in a range of sectors, namely, tree plantation, water management, sustainable agriculture, waste management, reducing air pollution, mangrove conservation and restoration, labelling and development, and sustainable buildings and other infrastructure.

At present, rules have only been notified for afforestation through tree plantation. Before dealing with the specifics as regards afforestation, a closer look at the overall scheme is in order.

GREEN CREDITS

The scheme envisages a “competitive market-based approach for incentivising environmental actions of various stakeholders.” The Indian Council for Forestry Research and Education (ICFRE) is designated as the administrator for the scheme, underlining the primacy given to afforestation among all the other identified sectors. ICFRE would appoint sectoral technical committees to assist it for different sectors.

Under this scheme, “green credits,” somewhat like carbon credits, could be earned as per standards and norms to be decided upon for each sector and normalised across the different sectors. For instance, as now notified in the rules for afforestation, one tree planted would generate one green credit.

Subsequent rules would lay down equivalent norms for, say, reduction of air pollution that would earn one credit, such that green credits earned from any sector could be traded in a uniform and level playing field.

These green credits may be traded through a “Green Credit Registry,” a mechanism and marketplace that would be created under the scheme. However, credits earned through any activity that the entity is obliged to perform under prevailing laws, such as compensatory afforestation, would not be tradable but could be used in other ways. For instance, such green credits could be used to offset corporate social responsibility (CSR) obligations.

A further stipulation under the scheme is that green credits cannot be earned on activities that also generate carbon credits. However, additional carbon credits could be earned for the carbon-saving co-benefit or component of an activity that generates green credits.

It is clear straightaway that the GCP is a money-spinning opportunity for corporates, who can add earnings through green credits to their usual earnings. For example, even though green credits generated through compensatory afforestation cannot be traded, it generates earnings through funds saved from CSR. It also remains to be seen how norms for industries are framed. Would transport companies earn green credits if they transition from fossil-fuel to electric vehicles (EV)? 

One of the major criticisms of the GCP is that it would be utilised for “greenwashing” of their activities by corporations engaged in environmentally harmful activities by showing compensatory activities elsewhere as “green,” proof of which would be green credits granted to them by obliging audit or monitoring authorities.

With all its flaws and limitations, especially the market mechanism, as discussed below, the GCP can only be as good as the environmental regulatory system allows. It is by now well known, that environment regulations in India have been totally captured by the State acting on behalf of corporate cronies. As such, green credits would be used to game the system, increase corporate earnings even while destroying the environment elsewhere, and provide a respectable veneer of environmental-friendliness.

MARKET MECHANISMS

It is now widely recognised that carbon credits and trading through the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) have generated considerable earnings for industries and companies in different parts of the world, notably in China and India, but the benefits for the environment and especially for emissions reduction are uncertain or negligible.

The initial idea under CDM was that only additionalities, that is, emissions reduction over and above what would normally be achieved in industry, would be eligible for carbon credits. Yet, as technologies have developed and been upgraded, what was earlier considered novel or an additionality have become industry standard now, but are seen to still be earning carbon credits!

This problem would be magnified manifold with green credits. How would you define “sustainable agriculture” or, even more tricky, how would you put a value to it compared to, say, one tree, if that itself is a standard, since a tree planted along a highway performs less ecological services than a tree or a cluster of trees in a forest? Should an incineration-based waste management plant generate green credits when it emits toxic gases into the air and nearby neighbourhoods?

Another very important aspect learned from carbon trading, which would apply even more to trading of green credits, is that carbon trading works best when there are ceilings or caps which drive industries to buy or sell carbon credits. What is the “competitive” incentive to trade green credits except money itself? If the green credit is priced too low, there is little incentive to earn it leave alone trade it. And if the green credit is priced too high, it will distort the market which will crash under its weight.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY FOR FORESTS           

The recent notification relates to rules for afforestation, and suffers from numerous flaws especially as regards to its supposed main goal, namely conservation and restoration of forests.

The rules state that “degraded land parcels (of 5 hectares or more), including open forest and scrub land, wasteland and catchment areas” would be identified by state forest departments for tree plantation under this scheme. It is also stipulated that plantation would be undertaken with a density of 1,100 trees per hectare.

This very starting point itself is highly problematic. Scrubland, grasslands, shrubbery and arid forests are valuable ecosystems in their own right, and should not be considered “degraded.” Further, such lands would not support the kind of tree density stipulated.

In fact, the scheme exposes forest ecosystems to double jeopardy. On the one hand, the scheme would encourage clearing of thinned-down or other natural forests with low tree cover and other ecosystems inside forest areas to facilitate tree plantation to earn green credits.

On the other hand, various natural ecosystems supporting large varieties of flora and fauna besides providing local people with fuel, fodder and other resources would be denuded and replaced with unsuitable trees, probably monocultures. The very purpose of the scheme would be defeated.

It should be noted that the earlier draft notification of GCP had provided for eco-restoration of various types of land inside designated forest areas, acknowledging that tree plantation is not the only way forward and that different types of ecosystems in forest areas had their own benefits and ecological services. But this has been abandoned in the latest rules in favour of simple to administer tree plantation, however unsuitable or ecologically unsustainable or unsound it may be.

Further, most so-called degraded forest lands are currently used and managed by tribal and other forest-dwelling communities either by virtue of the Forest Rights Act or the Joint Forest Management programme. There is no mention in the rules about forest rights, or about usufruct rights of tribals and other forest-dwelling communities as regards non-timber forest produce, or even their very right to lives and livelihoods in habitats inside forest areas. There must be explicit recognition of these rights, guarantees against evictions in the name of the GCP, and recognition of the role played by forest-dwelling communities in conservation and protection of forests.

All in all, there are serious concerns that the GCP could lead to profiteering by corporates, greenwashing, and further degradation of forests and diverse ecosystems. The almost complete capture of the environmental regulatory system by the government acting on behalf of corporates will call into question the norms, prices and trading mechanism for the so-called green credits.

Tapan Mishra is with the Paschim Banga Vigyan Mancha. D Raghunandan is with Delhi Science Forum and All India People’s Science Network. The views are personal.

 

Pakistani Farmers Launch a Nationwide Movement Demanding Fair Prices for Wheat

Abdul Rahman | 08 May 2024

• 
  
• 
  

Pakistan’s new government has decided to drastically reduce the procurement of wheat this year amidst record production, creating fear among farmers of massive losses and distress to the rural population.

Thousands of farmers in Pakistan have launched a nationwide movement demanding increased government procurement of wheat. The campaign will kick off with national mobilizations on Friday, May 10, Khalid Khokhar, the leader of Pakistan Kissan Ittehad (Pakistan Farmer Movement or PKI), a united body of most of the farmers’ unions in the country, said in a press conference on Sunday.

The mobilizations are set to kick off in Multan, Punjab and would be a continuation of the last month’s agitation in several parts of the country. Khokhar claimed that an even greater number of farmers’ organizations and groups would be participating in the campaign and mobilizations.

In the last week of April hundreds of farmers were arrested by Pakistani security forces following their protests in different parts of the country. Farmers have been protesting against the decision of the newly elected government, led by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, to drastically reduce the public procurement of wheat. Farmers have alleged that this will destroy the agriculture in the country and cause massive distress to the farming community.

Khokar claimed that farmers tried to resolve the issue through negotiation with the officials at different levels but failed to get any assurances. He claimed that farmers had to buy every input at inflated rates from “black markets” but would be forced to sell their products in the open market at throw away prices due to this policy.

The Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) government led by Sharif had decided to reduce the procurement saying it would only buy around 2 million tons of wheat from farmers at the minimum support price (MSP) of 3,900 Pakistani rupee (over USD 14) per 40 KG this year. Last year the government bought 5.6 million tons this way.

The government is claiming it is unable to buy more wheat due to massive stock from imports. The Sharif government, during its previous term, had started importing wheat due to the fall in domestic production caused by floods in 2022 and to ease the rise in prices of food items.  Farmers have pointed out that the government did not stop the imports on time despite reports of record crops this season. According to a report in Al Jazeera, between September 2023 and March 2024 Pakistan imported 3.5 million tons of wheat.

Corruption allegations have been lodged at the government and it has been forced to initiate an inquiry into the “wheat import scandal”.

This has led to allegations of corruption and Sharif government has been forced to constitute an inquiry into it. Khokhar alleged that the corrupt wheat import policy has caused a loss of over USD 1 billion to the country at a time when Pakistan has been facing a major forex shortage.

Massive losses for the farming community

Farmers in Pakistan are worried reduced procurement would lead to massive fall in prices of wheat and a cumulative loss of over USD 1.4 billion to the farmers at a time when there is record production. This year the total wheat production is expected to be over 32 million tons in Pakistan in comparison to 28 million tons in 2023.

This is a significant reduction in government procurement of less than 7% of total production against the convention of over 20% in the past. This would mean farmers would be forced to sell the wheat at market prices which would be much beyond the production cost.

The Pakistan government signed a USD 3 billion loan deal with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) last year. The deal has mandated withdrawal of subsidies from electricity leading to massive rise in electricity bills. Fertilizers are also more expensive than previous years.

Pakistan is facing unprecedented levels of inflation for more than two years now. In May last year the inflation was recorded at 38%. This April it “slowed” to 17%, which is the lowest in the last two years.

Amidst the inflation and fall in prices of their produce, farmers are struggling to continue farming in Pakistan and have experienced significant reductions in their income. Nearly 40% of Pakistan’s total labor force is involved in agriculture and nearly 70% of its total exports are related to the agricultural sector. Any large-scale decline in farmer’s income could exacerbate Pakistan’s economy and make the life of millions of Pakistani much more difficult at a time when poverty already affects 40% of the population. 

Courtesy: Peoples Dispatch

 

INDIA

Report Card: BJP and Crimes Against Women

Sabrang India | 06 May 2024

• 
  

The BJP’s track record on women issues has not been great in the past, especially on cases of violence against women. As Prajwal Revanna, MP from Karnataka in alliance with the BJP, seems to evade justice, Sabrang India takes a look at BJP’s past record with crimes against women.

A recent report by the Association for Democratic Reforms and National Election Watch revealed that 134 sitting MPs and MLAs in India face accusations in cases involving crimes against women. Among these, the BJP has the highest number of sitting MPs and MLAs with such cases at 44. 

How does this bode for the women of the country which have been under the rule of the BJP government for the past ten years? The BJP for one has not shied often from supporting men accused of rape and violence against women. 

While the BJP’s website repeatedly talks about Nari Shakti, and the need for removing discrimination and also to give the girl child ‘special emphasis’, BJP MPs and MLAs have often subjected their very own women colleagues to derogatory comments. 

BJP politicians have also not seemed to spare women in power that belong to the opposition. 

The PM Modi himself is not shy of having made comments many considered sexist. In 2018, he referred to Rajya Sabha MP Sonia Gandhi as ‘widow’ in a speech, “Ye Congress ki kaun si vidhwa thi jiske khate mein paisa jaata tha?” PM Modi did not even spare the families of politicians. When he was the chief minister of Gujarat he was reported once calling Trivandrum MP from Congress, Shashi Tharoor’s wife, Sunanda Pushkar, ‘a 50 crore girlfriend.’ 

The Congress leader is repeatedly hit with such comments. In 2019 Giriraj Singh once made a highly derogatory comment on her when it was in the news that actor Sapna Choudhury would join the Congress, “Rahul’s mother was also in the same profession in Italy and his father made her his own. He (Rahul Gandhi) should also take the family tradition forward and make Sapna his own.”

Crimes against women have been consistently rising in the country. In 2021, out of six million registered crimes, 428,278 cases were categorised as crimes against women. This marked a 26.35% increase over a span of six years since 2016 when 338,954 such cases were recorded. Similarly, according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), reported cases of rapes against Dalit women witnessed a troubling 45 percent increase from 2015 to 2020. The data tells us that on an average of 10 incidents of rape against Dalit women and girls are reported daily across India.

What contribution have BJP and their allies’ leaders made to these statistics? In the very recent case of sitting MP from the RD(S), which is part of the NDA alliance, from Karnataka, Prajwal Revanna, who has been noted to have made almost 3000 videos of women being sexually exploited or assaulted, is now reportedly absconding from the country. Sabrang India further noted how several leaders of the BJP have been accused of crimes against women, including MP Brijbushan Sharan Singh, now-convicted Kuldeep Singh Sengar and Ramdular Gond etc. 

Similarly, the BJP’s response to crimes against women has been harrowing. The Hathras rape and murder case of a Dalit woman in UP reveals the harrowing way in which the party has seemingly revealed its position on women’s issues. A young Dalit girl was brutally raped and subjected to brutal and fatal violence by four upper caste Thakur attackers in September 2020. The family of the victim were subjected to threats and fear and intimidation after the incident as it gained limelight. Her family was also denied the right to bury her, as her body was reportedly forcibly cremated by the UP police one night. Similarly, witnesses were also harassed and intimidated during the trial, which resulted in the conviction of only one Sandeep Sisodia, and acquittal of the three others. This took place despite the victim giving a testimony against the four in front of a magistrate before her death. Three Muslims, which included two journalists and a taxi driver, who were visiting Hathras to cover the incident were instead arrested and imprisoned for over three years. Furthermore, a report by The Wire claimed that the UP government, under BJP’s Yogi Adityanath, had tried to use PR firms to push the narrative in foreign media that the victim was not raped. 

Similarly, if we move east to Gujarat, the Bilkis Bano case was a harrowing case from the 2002 Gujarat massacre. Recently, in January 2024 the Supreme Court squashed Gujarat’s BJP-led government that granted remission to her rapists. Before the order was squashed, the rapists were released from jail to be received by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad with garlands and sweets. The rapists were also incidentally seen sharing the stage with BJP MLA and MP in Gujarat in 2023. 

Bilkis Bano had been gangraped in Gujarat while being pregnant. Seven of her family members, including her 3-year-old daughter, were murdered in the horrifying carnage. 

The track record of BJP, its ally parties and organisations, seems to paint a harrowing picture of the BJP’s stance on women’s issues. 

Courtesy: sabrang India