POTO — Portents of Paranoid Psyche

Columnist Dr. S M Rahman looks at the draconian Indian law supposedly against terrorists.

Socrates, made a perceptive statement: “when there are number of laws, drawn up with great exactitude, it is a proof that the city is badly administered for the inhabitants are compelled to frame laws in great numbers as a barrier against offences.” In case of India, it is very often more than ‘barrier’. It is ‘barbaric’ and barren of all quintessential norms of a civilized polity. It is ruthlessly repressive and expressive of dehumanized sensibility. It emanates from pathological disposition to perpetuate historical tyranny against people who are essentially seeking to resolve their existential dilemma — is the land in which they live, truly theirs or of ‘others’? It is a kind of logic, which William Myers, former Editor of Foreign Policy and President of Eurasia Foundation mentions: “the wars in Bosnia and the Caucasus are terrifyingly intense because they are not struggles for gain or glory but for identity and survival. The combatants are trying to answer the existential question, whose country is this? If it is mine you cannot stay, and if it is yours, I cannot stay — or if I am allowed to stay, I must agree to accept a second class status.”

Kashmiris in Indian Held Kashmir have resolved not to ‘accept the second class status’. It is a resolute struggle for identity and survival. According to Myers: “the struggle between White Settlers and Native Americans had the same pitiless ferocity to it. In effect, when the settlers arrived, the Native Americans knew that the US Army would not be far behind and that they would be cleansed from their own land. They would not have a country for much longer. Hence the savage nature of the struggle between the settlers and the Native Americans.”

Kashmiris are no Native Americans, and would not relinquish their fight till they breathe the fresh and invigorating air of ‘freedom’, even though they are pitted against most brutal Indian army — seven lac soldiers, annihilating the hapless inhabitants — men, women and children. It is a kind of ‘drunken hooliganism’, which characterizes the conduct of so-called Indian soldiers. One finds parallel in the recent Bosnian war, which Yahya Sadowski, reveals in his book, The Myth of Global Chaos: “Nearly I Million” Muslims have been targeted in besieged towns, subject to shelling, sniper fire, hunger and disease .... Most sources cite a death of 200,000. The ways in which those 200,000 victims had been selected and butchered seemed to suggest that remarkable levels of hatred, bloodlust and imagination were at work. The wars primary victims were non-combatants, especially women and children”3 The Serb callous sensibility, is what is typical of oppressive combatants in Kashmir. A western journalist documents how Serb combatants in Bosnia were eager to target civilians during siege of Sarajevo. Zjelkov [a Serb sniper] claimed he never shot at civilians ... Reeling in the Swivel seat of a mounted heavy-calibre machine gun, he fired round after round into down-town Sarajevo, declaring without affect. It is just like killing rabbits. I feel nothing.

Bosnians are Muslims and so are Kashmiris. To think of them as rabbits, is at the root of ‘deranged mentality’, be it at play in Palestine, Chechniya, Bosnia, Afghanistan, or Kashmir. There is yet another dimension, which Sadowaski mentions: Rape — a crime that accompanies most wars — was raised to a new level in Bosnia where Serb separatists, used it as an instrument of terror. An organized campaign was devised in which victims were systematically transported to concentrated locations, held for weeks or months and raped by men who had been instructed that this was a way of forcing Muslim women to bear Serb babies. The exact number of Bosnian women assaulted are matter of dispute, but in January 1993, the European Community produced a “mid-range figure of twenty thousand.”5 To suppress what is a war of liberation in Kashmir, rape of the womenfolk is routine occurrence, without any moral qualms not even by the “conscience keepers” of the globe, who ironically fight ‘terrorism’ to uphold the so-called sanctity of “civilization.”

It is, therefore, in the backdrop of savagery, which masquerades as Indian counter insurgency operations, that one must analyze, what Rajeev Dharan — an Indian Journalist, characterized the dangerous acronym — POTO, the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance. He thinks “it is being marketed as a panacea to fight terrorism in India for the next five years. Its predecessor, TDA (The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act) had a long reign of 10 years, 1985-1995. It was the most misused and abused anti-civil liberties legislation since independence. POTO is no better”6 He further illustrates that through TADA, till 1995, some 76,000 people were arrested. Acquittals were low — in November 1993 assessed at 0.81 percent in some area. By the year 1999, (years after TADA lapsed in 1995, there were 1,344 cases to be investigated and 4.958 trials to be completed.”7

The draconian nature of POTO is blatantly expressive of a chauvinistic mind aimed at projecting the macho image of the Indian government. That it is patently a political terrorism, does not require a very discerning mind. The communal dimension has been highlighted by a leading Indian historian — Irfan Habib. The BJP, according to him, “wants to make use of the perception that most terrorists happen to be Muslims and the recent rhetoric of the BJP leaders makes it clear that they see electoral gains in creating a communal polarization in UP.8 Kuldip Nayar, is also of the opinion that the “government is not to challenge the terrorists, but to chastise those who oppose saffronisation and are committed to civil liberties and human rights.”9

It is indeed ironic that India boastfully projecting itself as the largest democracy in the world, would be curtailing human freedom in such distasteful a manner. Under POTO bail is denied to individuals until he is found not guilty of the so-called offence. The investigation period in custody could stretch to 120 days. POTO also permits confessions made to police as legitimate evidence even though it is a common knowledge that police is quite capable of extracting any confession out of an individual, be he a criminal or otherwise. It is very often an agent of coercion at the behest of those who wield state power. Even citizens are required to spy on “individuals”, (barring lawyers) and the allegations made may result in detention for three years and unlimited fine. Property of the so-called terrorist could be confiscated without trial and organizations are banned on sheer whim of the authorities. A Muslim Indian journalist [Abbas Rizvi] analyses POTO: “The government’s one eyed approach can be felt in the case of POTO; it has named 25 organizations under it and all of them belong to the minorities. While the RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena and Bajrag Dal are involved in distributing trishul weapons to Hindus. 40 lac have already been distributed all over the nation.10

The Terrorist organizations listed in the schedule in the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance 2001, issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, contains eight Muslim and four Sikh organizations, besides those associated with insurgencies in Asam, Tripura, Bodoland etc, but Hindu militant organizations, who are notoriously famous for loot, arson, and all conceivable atrocities against Muslims, Sikhs and Christians and demolition of their sacred places are not mentioned, making the whole Ordinance look utterly prejudicial and discriminatory. One finds ‘reason’ for much omissions, when it is taken into account that the brain-child of the Ordinance is no other person than the Home Minister — Mr. L. K. Advani, and drafted by the so-called Law Minister, Arun Jaitely. Mr. Advani, who has himself been charge sheeted for ‘terrorism’, in the infamous Babri Mosque demolition case and the judgment is still pending with the Supreme Court, could not, after all, be expected to maintain the poise and propriety of law to be based on justice and equity. The 31-page document smacks of language typically depicting the legal aberration and mockery of democratic norms. For instance, under the blanket provision of ‘intent to aid any terrorist would be punishable with imprisonment for life and shall also be liable for fine,” makes practically every citizen vulnerable, as the prosecutor will have the ‘divine’ right to decipher the ‘intention’ of the so-called culprit. India would appear to be an extended Jurassic Park, where the lord of the jungle is the final arbiter. Only the proponents of Hindutva mentality could conceive of such draconian law, which ruthlessly strangulates civil liberties.

“Ordinance of terror”, therefore, has come under sharp criticism, by the conscientious objectors, particularly when taken into account that it was hurriedly thrust upon the nation, through a Presidential Ordinance, without parliamentary discussion, when its session was to be convened only five weeks later. The opposition also cannot reconcile to the fact that why was POTO at all necessary, when according to Singhvi, “we already have the wide National Security Act. Almost all states have wide ranging preventive detention laws ,.. specific trouble spots like Jammu and Kashmir and the North-east have special enactments like Disturbed Areas Act and Army “Special Powers Act”. All this is in addition to the comprehensive underlying criminal law structures of IPC and Cr. PC.”11

That POTO, like its predecessor TADA, would be an additional instrument of “state harassment”, is a bitter realization and further on the question whether it would actually stop or reduce terrorism, the unequivocal answer is “No”. But why POTO? It is a question, which needs unearthing the latent motive. There is a method in madness. It emanates from a deep-seated paranoia that the freedom fighters in Kashmir are exhibiting extraordinary resilience to withstand brutal atrocities committed on humanity at the hands of the Indian soldiers. It is a cause for despair and dissonance. What good is that mind-boggling figure of seven lac soldiers, who are not able to humble a few thousand freedom fighters. The ‘paranoia’ is overwhelming. Therefore the ‘ruse’ to dub them terrorists, and compulsion to promulgate POTO, is to accelerate “state terrorism” to an unprecedented level. POTO, is a ‘smoke-screen’ — “legal” cover — to enact the gory drama of systematic annihilation and ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiris.

It is, therefore, not a ploy to convince others but actually to convince themselves that they have the invincible power to crush any uprising. The success of the Kashmiri Mujahideen, it is feared will have a snowball effect, on India despite its phenomenal military might. Fear, is the main propeller of terror. Ralph White mentions: when conventional thinkers talk about the motives underlying war, they are likely to use words, such as hate, greed and craving for power. They are not likely to mention fear. Yet the historical record of acts of aggression in the Twentieth century suggests that exaggerated fear — fear of being attacked by an opponent conceived as diabolically aggressive — is likely to be one of the major driving forces, even on the side of the chief aggressor”.12 He cites that ‘Japan’s motivation in World War II, contained, apparently, a genuine though decidedly ‘paranoid’ component of defensive motivation. Most of the Japanese appear really to have believed that they were in danger of economic strangulation by western imperialism — with hostile power encircling them on all sides..”13 Unless India unloads the unwarranted historical ‘fear’ particularly of Muslim conquests, their passion for display of military prowess cannot be curtailed. The need is to be “good” to their own citizens and also to the neighbours.

 It is said that “Pericles, the great Athenian Statesman and General, was on his deathbed, his surrounding friends deeming him now insensible, began to indulge their sorrow for their expiring patron by enumerating his great qualities and success, his conquests and victories, the unusual length of his administration, and his nine trophies erected over the enemies of the republic. “You forget”, cries the dying hero, who had heard all, “you forget the most eminent of my praises, while you dwell so much on those vulgar advantages in which fortune had a principal share. You have not observed that no citizen has ever yet worn mourning on my account.”14 Unfortunately, Indian rulers cannot claim that as they have been tormentors of the South Asian region.

Notes and References

1Charles William Maynes, Squandering Triumph Foreign Affairs. Jan - Feb 1999, p.19.

2Ibid.

3Yahya Sadowski — The Myth of Global Chaos. Brookings Institution Press. Washington D.C. 1998. p.2.

4Ibid.

5Ibid, pp. 2-3.

6POTO: an assault on democracy — by Rajeev Dhavan The Hindu, Daily, 16 Nov. 2001.

7Ibid.

8POTO opportunity by Saba Naqvi Bhaumik - Outlook. New Delhi - 19 Nov. 2001.

9 Pushing the POTO by Kuldip Nayar — The Hindu - 28 Nov. 2001.

10Why India’s minorities abhor POTO, by Syed Haider Abbas Rizvi — (View from Lucknow). The News, Islamabad, 30 Dec. 2001.

11Ordinance of Terror, by Manu Singhvi. The Hindustan Times, New Delhi, 6 Nov. 2001.

12Ralph K. White — in the book Alternative Security edited by B. H. Weston. Westview Press 1990. pp. 180-181.

13Ibid, p.181.

14David Hume — An Inquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals. Liberal Arts Press Book. 1957, pp. 9-10. n