AIIMS nurses victims of wife-beating
“Half of those questioned said that violence affected their overall well-being”
“Domestic violence by marital partner continues to be the most common form of violence against women. Its acceptance and frequent justification poses challenge to the empowerment of women,’’ notes a new pilot study titled “Domestic violence against nurses by their marital partners” covering nurses at the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) here.
The study, authored by Kamlesh Kumari Sharma and Manju Vatsa of the AIIMS College of Nursing and published in the Indian Journal of Community Medicine, states that physical and sexual violence affects the nurses’ physical and mental health and leads to an inability to concentrate, loss of confidence in their ability and inability to work.
“Over half of the study subjects (56.7 per cent) reported that physical or sexual violence affected their overall well-being. Being slapped was the most common act of physical violence (40 per cent), 18.86 per cent nurses were physically abused while pregnant. Worse, 45.8 per cent of the physically abused victims were kicked/beaten when pregnant,’’ noted the study.
Higher violence was reported if husband had lower educational status or indulged in drinking. “The prevalence of violence decreased with increased number of rooms in the house and increase of education of the couple. Increased rooms probably meant more personal space and privacy and hence better understanding. Higher socio-economic status was also reported to have protective effect against domestic violence in a nation-wide study in India,” revealed the study.
In India, statistical evidence on the prevalence of domestic violence against nurses, its characteristics, impact, and their perceptions regarding acceptable behaviour for men and women are non-existent.
“To understand the issues related to domestic violence among nurses the present study was planned. Domestic violence is a sensitive and intimate issue.
The study subjects were selected from four departments at the Institute – main hospital, private wards (new and main hospital), Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital and Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences. Here nurses work in three shifts. Nursing is one of the most women-centred professions and is impacted by violence on several fronts. There are high levels of role conflict with the domestic role and significant level of occupational stress,” note the authors in their published work.
The study also points out that wife-beating was believed to be justified under certain circumstances by 42 per cent of the respondents, while 10-20 per cent women said that they did not have the right to refuse sex.
These findings were found to be similar to a World Health Organisation’s multi-country study (2005) findings.
“The perceived impact of violence in the form of health and other effects like sickness/absenteeism was very high and suggested a need for intervention at the workplace,’’ concludes the study.
____________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article3785967.ece?css=print
Published: August 18, 2012 01:17 IST | Updated: August 18, 2012 04:16 IST August 18, 2012
No country for young women
The Hindu In a poll of 370 gender experts on how well women fared in G20 countries, India was ranked the worst country to be a woman. File Photo: Arunangsu Roy Chowdhury
The bogey of ‘Indian cultural values’ has stifled conversation on women’s sexual rights
The startling murder of Pallavi Purkayastha, a 25-year-old legal professional, at her central Mumbai apartment on August 9 by the security guard of her building is another reminder of the abysmal levels of violence experienced by Indian women 66 years after Independence.
Pallavi appears to have been murdered while resisting the guard’s efforts to rape her. While a number of laws have been enacted over the course of the past few decades to address sexual violence against women, the fact is that women continue to be subjected to levels of violence that should shock the conscience of a country that has entered the 21st century and makes bold claims to be a new superpower.
In a poll of 370 gender experts on how well women fared in G20 countries (g20women.trust.org.), India was ranked the worst country to be a woman while Canada was the best. Saudi Arabia ranked second worst. While such polls are invariably limited in terms of bias — who counts as an expert as well as how statistics may be compiled — it does not detract from the fact that there is a serious need to examine why such extreme levels of violence against women continue to be tolerated. In a country that claims to traditionally revere its women, why do the perpetrators of violence against women seem to enjoy levels of impunity not entertained in other liberal democracies? Part of the answer rests in how women continue to be denied subjectivity and are infantilised as well as the bogey of Indian cultural values, which are nothing more than Victorian sexual mores in drag.
In response to Pallavi’s murder, the National Commission for Women appealed to Maharashtra Home Minister R.R. Patil to initiate steps to ensure the safety of women. The measures proposed included background checks of security guards, installation of CCTV cameras, intercoms, and security audits by cooperative housing societies in consultation with the local police. While these measures, if implemented, may provide a sense of better security, increase in surveillance techniques and strengthening of the security apparatus do little to address the disregard for women’s humanity in our society.
And such measures are often combined with an intensification of the moral surveillance of women’s lives, exemplified in the recent remarks of the Chairperson of the NCW that the violence was partly due to women blindly aping the West in terms of dress sense which was “eroding our culture and causing such crimes to happen”.
While such perceptions are not new and have been expressed from time to time by politicians as well as senior police officials across the country, they are based on two false assumptions: that violence against a woman is the woman’s responsibility, and secondly, that Indians are not able to accommodate a woman’s right to bodily integrity and sexual autonomy.
While laws continue to be enacted ostensibly for the benefit of women, invariably, these laws focus on sexual wrongs rather than women’s sexual rights. Violence and a conservative sexual morality combine to treat women as subjects who need to be protected from sex, as vulnerable and incapable of informed consent around issues of sexual intimacy or to defend themselves. They also tend to produce an extremely unflattering portrayal of all Indian men as sexual predators. To only focus on sexual wrongs, where everyone from the media to the politician project themselves as experts, is to constantly erode the space for healthy conversations on sexual rights and the promotion of healthy human relationships. Even in universities, where the new Indian woman is claiming her space in India’s modernisation project, her freedom is curtailed by highly paternalistic and deeply problematic administrative rules that prohibit “public displays of affection” and penalise such displays together with obscene, lewd and lascivious behaviour.
The failure to distinguish between sexual violence and sexual rights stigmatises all sexual interactions and intimacies between adults, including consensual and respectful ones.
Sex and intimacy are cast as negative, degrading and indecent, something from which the good, decent Indian woman ought to be protected. The protectionism combines with a sex phobia that ensures sex remains in the closet. And any claims for sexual rights become bizarrely associated with something Western, decadent, hedonistic or deviant.
It is time for the media, educational institutions, and the political establishment to start treating the subject of sex and intimacy with more respect and maturity than has been the case thus far. Such a process would entail promoting a culture in the work place, educational institutions and civic society that promotes conversations around sexual rights, where sex and respect for sexual integrity and autonomy is regarded as a natural and healthy part of human relationships.
It is also incumbent on men to start holding men accountable for their behaviour towards women, and not because they are mothers, daughters, sisters or wives. Rather, such a move is necessary to de-stigmatise the Indian male whose gender credentials remain in tatters. It will also help to shift the focus away from a woman’s attire, her behaviour, marital status, or occupation, and ensure that consent and bodily integrity become the line along which sexual relationships and interactions are conducted. India will be independent only when Indian women’s independence and right to full subjectivity is guaranteed and genuinely respected.
______________________________
 |
North-East exodus: Google, Facebook want govt to seek US help to share info on web pages with inflammatory content | |
| |
A woman and her child rest after disembarking from a train from the southern Bangalore.
Citing jurisdiction issues, Google, Twitter and Facebook have asked the government to route its request to share information on the web pages containing inflammatory content through the US government. Rumours and morphed images circulated on these websites had fuelled a hate campaign against the North-Eastern people, triggering their panic run to their home states from various parts of India. Proxy servers and Virtual Private Network services, which conceal the user identity operating from a number of countries, appear to have been used for uploading inciting posts and images. The government wants these sites to provide the registration details and access logs of the people who uploaded such content. Most of them were suspected to be from Pakistan. "The government had sent a request to the social networking sites to remove the inflammatory content and had also sought information related to web accounts and activities to track down the groups involved in the hate campaign," a senior ministry of communication & information technology (IT) official told Mail Today. "The websites have refused to comply on the grounds that they are not obliged to part with any such information as the details required are stored outside India. They have added that any such request for information and details about IP addresses which are outside India must be routed via the US government," the official said. Google, which also controls YouTube and Blogspot.com, wants the government to approach it through the US government, with which India has a mutual legal assistance treaty. "Google has informed that since it is governed by local laws in the US, it would be difficult for the company to co-operate directly with India. We are approaching the US government through an official request and letter rogatory to block web pages and also provide us the registration details and access logs of the persons who uploaded such content," a home ministry official said. Their brazen refusal, as also the government's reluctance to take a tough stand on the matter, has surprised cyber law experts. "Going via the US channel is not a good idea. The government must take a tough stand as this is a serious matter of national security," cyber law expert Pawan Duggal said. "I think it is high time the government adopted the Chinese way in this regard. If these sites are operating in India and their content is directed towards the Indian audience, they must comply with the country's IT law. This is the standard practice across the world. They cannot get away by saying that they operate under the US law. Our IT law has provisions for punitive action in such cases."  Google, on its part, issued a statement on Tuesday saying any content intended to incite violence was already prohibited on its sites, including YouTube videos. "We understand the gravity of the situation... and continue to work with relevant authorities," it said. However, sources in the company added that the government's request to share information could not be immediately complied with. "We are ready to cooperate on removing such content, but what they are asking for are details of IP addresses and particulars of the users. As these are outside Indian jurisdiction, they have to route the request via the US government," a senior official in Google India said. Twitter and Facebook were not available for comment.  But Twitter is proving to be an equally tough nut to crack as the microblogging site has refused to block a number of web pages, as asked by the Union home ministry. Ministry officials said out of the 310 web pages flagged by the government for carrying inflammatory content related to the Assam violence, only 207 have been effectively blocked so far. Twitter was "not very keen" to block 28 web pages which still carried content that could incite passions, they added. "The resistance being posed by Twitter is now being taken up with the website through a direction being issued again on Tuesday," a ministry official said. A statement from the ministry of communications and IT said: "An intermediary social networking site has responded that the uploaders of the inflammatory content are outside the jurisdiction of the country, thereby implying that they are not obliged to take any constructive step to deal with it." To build a solid case against Pakistan, the government is now banking on the US as well as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, from whose territories the servers seem to be have been used as proxies to upload inflammatory content to cause communal disharmony in India. "Three organisations in Pakistan - Jamait -e-Islami, Tehreeke-Insaaf and a private TV channel of Pakistan - are under the scanner for uploading such content. We need to establish the chain of such content being uploaded and the US has to help us out in a big way," the home ministry official said.  While the government might have to wait for US assistance to get the details sought, it has decided to crack the whip on the websites which have refused to remove inflammatory content. "We have got strict orders from the home ministry to block all such sites. We have shortlisted 350 more such web pages which will be blocked for spreading hate messages," an IT ministry official said.
The move came a day after the government announced to block 254 web pages for posting inflammatory content.
The IT department had issued an advisory last week to all the intermediaries, including national and international websites, advising them to take necessary action on priority basis to disable inflammatory and hateful content hosted on their websites. But many of such "inflammatory" web pages have still not been blocked.
| |
| URL for this article : | |||||||||||||||
| http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/government-google-twitter-facebook-uncle-sam-hate-sites/1/214094.html | |||||||||||||||
Published: August 24, 2012 09:57 IST | Updated: August 24, 2012 09:57 IST NEW DELHI, August 24, 2012
Women demand food security, better conditions
The Hindu National Federation of Indian Women president Aruna Roy, general secretary Annie Raja (left) and vice-president Primla Loomba addressing the media in New Delhi on Thursday. Photo: V. Sudershan
Demanding food security, universalisation of the Public Distribution System (PDS) and expressing their concern over the increasing violence against women in the country, the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) on Thursday announced that it will hold two major national protests on September 18 and October 2 on the issues.
Explaining the decision, which was taken at the Federation’s recently concluded all-India conference held in Chennai, NFIW president Aruna Roy said: “We need to focus on the systematic rise in violence against women, including molestation, rape, witch hunt, moral policing and a whole range of structural social and economic oppression. There is also an urgent need to speak of women’s rights not exclusive to, but in conjunction with other human and development rights.”
She added: “Even the representation of women in the media which is tied to the project of consumerism unleashed by the new economic policy is also an urgent issue that we will focus on. While the visibility of women in media is increasing, what is missing is empowerment. We need to link the two.”
She also questioned the efficacy of the National Commission for Women and said, “The Commission needs to reflect on its role and work on gender-based issues. There is an urgent need for some serious evaluation and thinking on what it is doing for women’s issues in India.”
NFIW working president Gargi Chakravarty said: “Violence against a woman starts even before she is born and continues through all the phases of her life. Even after 66 years of Independence and 60 years of Indian Parliamentary Democracy, it is a shame that victimisation of women in various horrific forms still continues throughout the country.”
Meanwhile, pointing to the rising levels of hunger and malnutrition especially among women and children in the country, NFIW general secretary Annie Raja said: “The United Progressive Alliance lacks political will and social commitment to bring a comprehensive and Universal Food Security Bill. The Bill which was tabled in Parliament or the reported “Plan-B” proposal cannot ensure access and availability of food to the people. The NFIW has decided to intensify its campaign and struggles on these issues. As a part of this, it has been decided that September 18 -- World Food Day -- will be observed as a demand day and the slogan will be ‘Food Must Be Our Fundamental Right’ and it has to be guaranteed.”
She added: “On this day dharnas and picketing of the Central Government offices will be organised. This will be done from village to the National Capital.”
Ms. Raja noted that to protest against the uncontrolled and escalating violence against women, the NFIW will observe October 2 as a day to protest. She said, “The main slogan for this campaign is ‘Stop violence against women, ensure their safety and security’. On this day human chain in front of the Central and State Government offices will be organised. We also appeal to all organisations and movements who support our issues of struggle to join in both these agitations.”
____________________________________
No DNA profiling facility to trace missing children
Missing persons cell at
Darya Ganj in Delhi.- Photo: V.V. Krishnan
India calls them its future. But as lakhs of children are
kidnapped across the country each year, pushed into sex or organ trade or bonded
labour, precious little is being done to find them and restore them to their
parents.
For these children, in the meantime, it is living through the
worst nightmare. Getting separated from one’s parents while going to a market
and seeing only strange faces all around may be enough to drive any child to
tears. But when it comes to these kidnapped children, this is just the beginning
of one long ordeal.
At the other end, for the parents it is an even bigger horror; not
getting to see the child they were bringing up with so much affection — and the
constant fear of what he or she might be undergoing among strangers.
The Supreme Court recently asked the Centre and all the State
governments to state what they have been doing to trace the 55,000 children who
have officially gone missing in the past three years. It issued the notices on a
petition, which had alleged that these children were kidnapped for the purpose
of prostitution, bonded labour, removal of vital organs such as kidneys and
eyes, bootlegging and smuggling.
Incidentally, on July 18, the National Human Rights Commission
(NHRC) had asked the Delhi government and the Delhi Police to submit a report on
claims that at least 50 children went missing from the Capital in the first
eight days of that month.
It had also asked them to inform whether the guidelines on missing
children issued in August 2007 have been strictly followed.
The NHRC had in the wake of the Nithari kidnappings and murders of
children in Noida, constituted a five-member committee, under member P.C.
Sharma, which prepared an exhaustive report on the subject of missing
children.
The idea behind the exercise was to “put an end to this callous
indifference and insecurity with regard to the protection of children and to
prevent more lives from being lost in similar crimes.”
The NHRC Action Research on Trafficking had earlier in 2005 stated
that in any given year, on an average of 44,000 children are reported missing;
and of them, as many as 11,000 remain untraced.
“The revelations at Nithari exemplify that missing children may
end up in a variety of places and situations — killed and buried in a
neighbour’s backyard, working as cheap forced labour in illegal
factories/establishments/homes, exploited as sex slaves or forced into the child
porn industry, as camel jockeys in Gulf countries, as child beggars in begging
rackets, as victims of illegal adoptions or forced marriages, or perhaps worse
than any of these as victims of organ trade and even grotesque cannibalism as
reported at Nithari,” the report had stated.
The Committee had noted that “when a child goes missing, nobody,
except the perpetrator, knows the real intent behind it.”
It had noted that “even a child who has run away on purpose is
also susceptible to being kidnapped, abducted, abused or assaulted,” and
observed that “this raises the question as to why cases of missing children are
not treated as cognisable offence.”
While acknowledging the role of various non-governmental
organisations such as Childline, India’s first 24x7 toll-free tele-helpline
which operates in over 73 cities and towns in India; Bal Sakha in Patna; and the
National Centre for Missing Children in Madhya Pradesh that runs a website,
missingindiankids.com, the Committee had observed that funding was
a serious issue with these organisations.
The NHRC Committee had recommended that issue of “missing
children” be made a “priority issue” by all stakeholders, especially the law
enforcement agencies; that there be missing persons squad/desk in police
stations and as per Supreme Court guidelines there be “prompt and effective
steps for tracing missing children.”
It had also noted that as per the directions given by the Delhi
High Court, a Cell relating to missing persons/children was set up in the
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) but lamented that due to lack of adequate
resources, it was not able to achieve desired results.
The NHRC had also noted that “since the CBI is a Central
investigating agency having powers and jurisdiction to take up cases of
inter-state and international ramifications, it would be desirable to
strengthen this Cell to enhance its capacity to coordinate and investigate
criminal cases relating to missing children and persons.”
The need for such a Central repository has long been felt by those
working towards recovery and rehabilitation of missing children. As Anuj
Bhargava, a trustee of missingindiankids.com, which has been operating for over
a decade from Bhopal and has helped in the recovery of six children thus far by
putting up on its website information and photographs on missing children from
across the country, said: “The need of the hour is a Central repository to
collect, collate and analyse the data pertaining to missing children.”
Mr. Bhargava, who has attended several international conferences
on the issue of missing children, said in India there was also a need to look at
technology in detail to ensure speedy recovery of the missing children. He said
DNA profiling could prove to be a handy tool in this field.
Incidentally, as per Interpol, “with the exception of identical
twins, each person’s deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is unique which makes DNA
sampling useful for solving crimes, identifying victims of disasters and
locating missing persons.”
The United States realised this about a decade and a half ago when
in 1998, it established the national DNA database, known as the National DNA
Index System. This system now has over 11 million searchable profiles and has
aided close to 170,000 investigations.
As per the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), DNA databases
have been particularly helpful to investigations that have been on for a long
time and were no longer providing new leads.
The FBI has also been sharing its Combined DNA Index System
(CODIS) technology with law enforcement agencies in other countries.
This system, as per the agency, blends forensic science and
computer technology into an effective tool for solving violent crimes by
allowing laboratories to store, compare, and match DNA records from offenders,
crime scene evidence, unidentified human remains, and relatives of missing
persons.
________________________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-newdelhi/article3825947.ece?css=print
|
|
North-East exodus: Google, Facebook want govt to seek US help to share info on web pages with inflammatory content | |
| |
A woman and her child rest after disembarking from a train from the southern Bangalore.
Citing jurisdiction issues, Google, Twitter and Facebook have asked the government to route its request to share information on the web pages containing inflammatory content through the US government. Rumours and morphed images circulated on these websites had fuelled a hate campaign against the North-Eastern people, triggering their panic run to their home states from various parts of India. Proxy servers and Virtual Private Network services, which conceal the user identity operating from a number of countries, appear to have been used for uploading inciting posts and images. The government wants these sites to provide the registration details and access logs of the people who uploaded such content. Most of them were suspected to be from Pakistan. "The government had sent a request to the social networking sites to remove the inflammatory content and had also sought information related to web accounts and activities to track down the groups involved in the hate campaign," a senior ministry of communication & information technology (IT) official told Mail Today. "The websites have refused to comply on the grounds that they are not obliged to part with any such information as the details required are stored outside India. They have added that any such request for information and details about IP addresses which are outside India must be routed via the US government," the official said. Google, which also controls YouTube and Blogspot.com, wants the government to approach it through the US government, with which India has a mutual legal assistance treaty. "Google has informed that since it is governed by local laws in the US, it would be difficult for the company to co-operate directly with India. We are approaching the US government through an official request and letter rogatory to block web pages and also provide us the registration details and access logs of the persons who uploaded such content," a home ministry official said. Their brazen refusal, as also the government's reluctance to take a tough stand on the matter, has surprised cyber law experts. "Going via the US channel is not a good idea. The government must take a tough stand as this is a serious matter of national security," cyber law expert Pawan Duggal said. "I think it is high time the government adopted the Chinese way in this regard. If these sites are operating in India and their content is directed towards the Indian audience, they must comply with the country's IT law. This is the standard practice across the world. They cannot get away by saying that they operate under the US law. Our IT law has provisions for punitive action in such cases." Google, on its part, issued a statement on Tuesday saying any content intended to incite violence was already prohibited on its sites, including YouTube videos. "We understand the gravity of the situation... and continue to work with relevant authorities," it said. However, sources in the company added that the government's request to share information could not be immediately complied with. "We are ready to cooperate on removing such content, but what they are asking for are details of IP addresses and particulars of the users. As these are outside Indian jurisdiction, they have to route the request via the US government," a senior official in Google India said. Twitter and Facebook were not available for comment. But Twitter is proving to be an equally tough nut to crack as the microblogging site has refused to block a number of web pages, as asked by the Union home ministry. Ministry officials said out of the 310 web pages flagged by the government for carrying inflammatory content related to the Assam violence, only 207 have been effectively blocked so far. Twitter was "not very keen" to block 28 web pages which still carried content that could incite passions, they added. "The resistance being posed by Twitter is now being taken up with the website through a direction being issued again on Tuesday," a ministry official said. A statement from the ministry of communications and IT said: "An intermediary social networking site has responded that the uploaders of the inflammatory content are outside the jurisdiction of the country, thereby implying that they are not obliged to take any constructive step to deal with it." To build a solid case against Pakistan, the government is now banking on the US as well as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, from whose territories the servers seem to be have been used as proxies to upload inflammatory content to cause communal disharmony in India. "Three organisations in Pakistan - Jamait -e-Islami, Tehreeke-Insaaf and a private TV channel of Pakistan - are under the scanner for uploading such content. We need to establish the chain of such content being uploaded and the US has to help us out in a big way," the home ministry official said. While the government might have to wait for US assistance to get the details sought, it has decided to crack the whip on the websites which have refused to remove inflammatory content. "We have got strict orders from the home ministry to block all such sites. We have shortlisted 350 more such web pages which will be blocked for spreading hate messages," an IT ministry official said.
The move came a day after the government announced to block 254 web pages for posting inflammatory content.
The IT department had issued an advisory last week to all the intermediaries, including national and international websites, advising them to take necessary action on priority basis to disable inflammatory and hateful content hosted on their websites. But many of such "inflammatory" web pages have still not been blocked.
| |
| URL for this article : |
| http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/government-google-twitter-facebook-uncle-sam-hate-sites/1/214094.html |
Published: August 24, 2012 09:57 IST | Updated: August 24, 2012 09:57 IST NEW DELHI, August 24, 2012
Women demand food security, better conditions
The Hindu National Federation of Indian Women president Aruna Roy, general secretary Annie Raja (left) and vice-president Primla Loomba addressing the media in New Delhi on Thursday. Photo: V. Sudershan
Demanding food security, universalisation of the Public Distribution System (PDS) and expressing their concern over the increasing violence against women in the country, the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) on Thursday announced that it will hold two major national protests on September 18 and October 2 on the issues.
Explaining the decision, which was taken at the Federation’s recently concluded all-India conference held in Chennai, NFIW president Aruna Roy said: “We need to focus on the systematic rise in violence against women, including molestation, rape, witch hunt, moral policing and a whole range of structural social and economic oppression. There is also an urgent need to speak of women’s rights not exclusive to, but in conjunction with other human and development rights.”
She added: “Even the representation of women in the media which is tied to the project of consumerism unleashed by the new economic policy is also an urgent issue that we will focus on. While the visibility of women in media is increasing, what is missing is empowerment. We need to link the two.”
She also questioned the efficacy of the National Commission for Women and said, “The Commission needs to reflect on its role and work on gender-based issues. There is an urgent need for some serious evaluation and thinking on what it is doing for women’s issues in India.”
NFIW working president Gargi Chakravarty said: “Violence against a woman starts even before she is born and continues through all the phases of her life. Even after 66 years of Independence and 60 years of Indian Parliamentary Democracy, it is a shame that victimisation of women in various horrific forms still continues throughout the country.”
Meanwhile, pointing to the rising levels of hunger and malnutrition especially among women and children in the country, NFIW general secretary Annie Raja said: “The United Progressive Alliance lacks political will and social commitment to bring a comprehensive and Universal Food Security Bill. The Bill which was tabled in Parliament or the reported “Plan-B” proposal cannot ensure access and availability of food to the people. The NFIW has decided to intensify its campaign and struggles on these issues. As a part of this, it has been decided that September 18 -- World Food Day -- will be observed as a demand day and the slogan will be ‘Food Must Be Our Fundamental Right’ and it has to be guaranteed.”
She added: “On this day dharnas and picketing of the Central Government offices will be organised. This will be done from village to the National Capital.”
Ms. Raja noted that to protest against the uncontrolled and escalating violence against women, the NFIW will observe October 2 as a day to protest. She said, “The main slogan for this campaign is ‘Stop violence against women, ensure their safety and security’. On this day human chain in front of the Central and State Government offices will be organised. We also appeal to all organisations and movements who support our issues of struggle to join in both these agitations.”
____________________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3824666.ece?css=print
Published: August 26, 2012 23:59 IST | Updated: August 26, 2012 23:59 IST NEW DELHI, August 26, 2012
No central repository, DNA profiling facility to trace missing children
India calls them its future. But as lakhs of children are kidnapped across the country each year, pushed into sex or organ trade or bonded labour, precious little is being done to find and restore them to their parents.
For these children, it is living through the worst nightmare. Getting lost in markets and seeing strange faces all around may put a child in utter agony. But for a kidnapped child, this is just the beginning of a long ordeal.
At the other end, for the parents it is an even bigger horror; not getting to see the child they were bringing up with so much affection — and the constant fear of what he or she might be undergoing among strangers.
The Supreme Court recently asked the Centre and all the State governments to state what they have been doing to trace the 55,000 children who, officially, have gone missing in the past three years. It issued notice on a petition, which alleged that these children were kidnapped for the purpose of prostitution, bonded labour, removal of vital organs such as kidneys and eyes, bootlegging and smuggling.
Incidentally, on July 18, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) asked the Delhi government and police to submit a report on claims that at least 50 children went missing from the Capital in the first eight days of that month.
It also asked them to inform whether the guidelines on missing children issued in August 2007 were strictly followed.
The NHRC had, in the wake of the Nithari kidnappings and murders of children in Noida, constituted a five-member committee under member P.C. Sharma, which prepared an exhaustive report on missing children.
“Callous indifference”
The idea behind the exercise was to “put an end to this callous indifference and insecurity with regard to the protection of children and to prevent more lives from being lost in similar crimes.”
In 2005, the NHRC Action Research on Trafficking stated that in any given year, on an average of 44,000 children are reported missing; and of them, as many as 11,000 remain untraced.
Nithari incident
“The revelations at Nithari exemplify that missing children may end up in a variety of places and situations — killed and buried in a neighbour’s backyard, working as cheap forced labour in illegal factories/establishments/homes, exploited as sex slaves or forced into the child porn industry, as camel jockeys in the Gulf countries, as child beggars in begging rackets, as victims of illegal adoptions or forced marriages, or perhaps worse than any of these as victims of organ trade and even grotesque cannibalism as reported at Nithari,” the report said.
The committee noted that “when a child goes missing, nobody, except the perpetrator, knows the real intent behind it.”
It noted that “even a child who has run away on purpose is also susceptible to being kidnapped, abducted, abused or assaulted, raising the question as to why reports of missing children are not treated as cognisable offence.”
NGOs’ role
While acknowledging the role of various non-governmental organisations such as Childline, India’s first 24x7 toll-free tele-helpline which operates in over 73 cities and towns; Bal Sakha in Patna; and the National Centre for Missing Children in Madhya Pradesh that runs website missingindiankids. com, the committee observed that funding was a serious issue with these organisations.
The committee recommended that the issue of “missing children” be made a “priority issue” by all stakeholders, especially the law enforcement agencies; that there be missing persons squad/desk in police stations and as per Supreme Court guidelines there be “prompt and effective steps for tracing missing children.”
Scarce resources
It noted that as per the directions of the Delhi High Court, a cell relating to missing persons/children was set up in the Central Bureau of Investigation but lamented that due to lack of adequate resources, it was not able to achieve the desired results.
“Since the CBI is a central investigating agency, having powers and jurisdiction to take up cases of inter-state and international ramifications, it would be desirable to strengthen this cell to enhance its capacity to coordinate and investigate criminal cases relating to missing children and persons,” it said.
Need for a central repository has long been felt by those working towards recovery and rehabilitation of missing children. Anuj Bhargava, a trustee of missingindiankids.com, which has been operating for over a decade from Bhopal and has helped in the recovery of six children by putting up on its website information and photographs on missing children from across the country, said: “The need of the hour is a central repository to collect, collate and analyse the data pertaining to missing children.”
Looking to technology
Mr. Bhargava, who has attended several international conferences on missing children, said in India there was need to look at technology in detail to ensure speedy recovery of missing children. DNA profiling could prove to be a handy tool in this field.
Incidentally, as per Interpol, “with the exception of identical twins, each person’s deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is unique, which makes DNA sampling useful for solving crimes, identifying victims of disasters and locating missing persons.”
The United States realised this about a decade-and-half ago. In 1998, it established a national DNA database known as the National DNA Index System. This system now has over 11 million searchable profiles and has aided close to 1,70,000 investigations.
As per the Federal Bureau of Investigation, DNA databases have been particularly helpful to investigations that have been on for a long time and were no longer providing new leads.
The FBI has also been sharing its Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) technology with law enforcement agencies in other countries.
This system, as per the agency, blends forensic science and computer technology into an effective tool for solving violent crimes by allowing laboratories to store, compare, and match DNA records from offenders, crime scene evidence, unidentified human remains, and relatives of missing persons.
________________________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-newdelhi/article3825947.ece?css=print
|
ON JULY 6th, a month after an altercation at a mosque in a region run by
(non-Muslim) tribesmen in north-east India, four men on motorcycles shot and
killed two Muslims. Six weeks later, some 80 people have been killed in communal
bloodletting; the army has been sent into Assam with orders to shoot to kill;
tens of thousands of north-easterners in other parts of India have fled homeward
in fear of their lives; India has accused Pakistanis of being the origin of
doctored video messages designed to stir up religious hatred; and
400,000-500,000 Indians are homeless or displaced within Assam, the largest
involuntary movement of people inside the country since independence. How on
earth did a local conflict, one of many in the area, produce such devastating
nationwide consequences?
The spark for the extraordinary sequence of events was a fight in western
Assam between indigenous Bodo tribesmen (pronounced Boro) and Bengali-speakers
who have been moving into the area for more than a century. The Bodo say the
incomers are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh and want them to be kicked
out.
The migrants are mostly Muslim. The Bodo are animist or Christian. Muslims
have grown modestly as a share of Assam’s population (from 24% to 31% in the
three decades to 2001). No surge explains the latest violence, although the
Muslim population of western Assam is growing faster. In some villages the Bodo
are now a minority. They say they feel swamped by Muslim immigrants.
However, the conflict is not primarily about religion. It is about land. The
Bodo hold land in common. The Bengali-speakers are settled farmers, anxious to
establish private-property rights as protection against dispossession. In 2003,
after a long, violent campaign for autonomy, the Bodo got their own Bodo
Territorial Council, on whose turf outsiders may not own property. The Bodo
consider all Muslims outsiders—hence the dispute at the mosque.
Assam’s conflict has been going on for decades. A massacre in 1983 was far
more brutal than this year’s violence. Yet until now the dispute, like other
insurgencies of the north-east, has had no real impact elsewhere in the
country.
This time, there were riots in Mumbai and attacks in nearby Pune on people
from Manipur. Some 30,000 north-easterners fled from Bangalore, nine of them
being thrown off a moving train. Some authorities encouraged the exodus by
laying on special trains: 30,000 tickets to Guwahati, Assam’s capital, were sold
in three days.
The impact of mobile phones has made a difference. On August 12th people
started getting text messages warning north-easterners to go home before the end
of Ramadan (August 20th). They also got video messages with doctored images
purporting to show the bodies of Muslims killed in Assam. In fact these were
victims of Cyclone Nargis in 2008 in Myanmar.
India’s home minister, Sushil Kumar Shinde, said that many of the fake images
came from websites in Pakistan and asked for the Pakistani government’s help in
closing them down. Pakistan denied involvement. India ordered the blocking of
over 250 websites and asked mobile-service providers to restrict the number of
SMS messages. Yet the images have gone viral.
The Assam conflict also spread because people elsewhere sought to capitalise
on it. Mumbai saw rival protests by a big Muslim organisation, the Raza Academy,
then a big Hindu one, the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena. The opposition
(Hindu-nationalist) Bharatiya Janata Party said Assam’s problem is illegal
immigration from Bangladesh. Assam is ruled by the Congress party. Its chief
minister, Tarun Gogoi, said bluntly “there are no Bangladeshis in the clash but
Indian citizens.” The Assam conflict has not been such partisan fodder
before.
The reverberations across the rest of the country may force Indians to focus
for once on the chronic failings of government policy in the north-east. Linked
to the rest of the country only by a “chicken’s neck” stretch of land 22km wide,
the region is isolated, poor and different. Assam, easily its biggest state, is
one of India’s poorest. North-easterners look different: a Manipuri teacher in
Pune says everyone from passers-by to his pupils calls him, offensively,
“Chinky”. North-easterners call the rest of the country “mainland India”.
One manifestation of this distinctiveness is the persistence of insurgencies.
The Institute for Conflict Management, a think-tank, lists 26 active armed
groups in the region, and ten organisations proscribed by India’s home ministry.
There are armed separatists in five of the seven states. In the early 2000s the
death toll was 1,700 a year.
Dealing with such a region was always going to be hard. Yet successive
governments have made things worse. They have attempted to placate insurgent
groups by giving them more autonomy. The north-east has 16 such areas, more than
the rest of India. But giving each group a place of its own creates restive new
minorities within the area—as in Bodoland.
National politicians have also shied away from dealing with illegal
migration, partly because the issue is toxic and partly because local
politicians like to register newcomers as voters. For a while, Assam even had
its own immigration policy, until that was struck down by the Supreme Court. By
letting ambiguity about incomers’ legal status persist, politicians leave the
field open to armed extremists who want to kick all Muslims out.
Central governments have attempted to buy peace. Between 20% and 55% of
north-eastern states’ GDP comes in transfers from the centre—a huge proportion.
It keeps their economies going, but turns local governments into client states
surrounded by autonomous areas ruled by former insurgents, while armed gangs
wage guerrilla campaigns at the margins.
It is fair to say there have been some improvements. Fatalities have fallen
since 2008, thanks to a deal with Bangladesh which denied some insurgents their
former bases. But as is clear from the Bodo conflict, the grievances which
produced the insurgencies remain. India’s long-term goals in the region are to
encourage its integration with the rest of the country, to use the north-east to
boost economic ties with South-East Asia, and to check China’s influence in
Myanmar. At the moment, none of those aims is being advanced.
___________________________________
Published: August 28, 2012 23:55 IST | Updated: August 29, 2012
02:39 IST NEW DELHI, August 28,
2012
PCI wants law changed to bring TV, social media under its umbrella
Justice Markandey Katju
‘Unregulated electronic media playing havoc with lives of people’
Terming broadcasters’ attempts at self-regulation “futile and
meaningless,” the Press Council of India (PCI) has asked the government to amend
law and bring the electronic media — both broadcast and social — under the ambit
of an expanded and renamed Media Council.
PCI chairman Markandey Katju has been urging the inclusion of the
electronic media under the Council’s regulatory umbrella ever since he took
charge last year. However, the recent exodus of people from the northeast from
several metros, allegedly misled by an unregulated electronic media, seems to
have been a trigger for the PCI’s new resolve.
At a meeting here on Monday, the PCI passed a resolution asking
the Union government to amend the Press Council Act, 1978, by bringing the
electronic media within the purview of the Act, renaming it as The Media
Council, and giving it more powers.
Given the “prevailing circumstances of the country… there should
not be any dilly-dallying in the matter by the government,” said a PCI
statement.
Interestingly, the PCI resolution specifically refers to the
social media as well as the broadcast media.
“In recent times, experience has shown that the unregulated
electronic media is playing havoc with the lives of people. An example is what
happened to the people of the northeast,” it said.
When the Press Council Act was originally enacted, there was no
electronic media, but the law now needed to be amended to take the current
situation into account.
“Journalistic ethics apply not only to the print media,” said the
PCI resolution.
The Council dismissed the assertion of the broadcast media that
their own self-regulatory measures are sufficient, with any further governmental
oversight amounting to an attack on the freedom of the press.
“Experience has shown that the claim of the broadcast media for
self-regulation is futile and meaningless, because self-regulation is an
oxymoron,” said the statement.
“Regulation is different from control. In control, there is no
freedom, while in regulation, there is freedom, but it is subject to reasonable
restrictions in the public interest,” it said.
Regulation should be done by an independent statutory authority,
including media representatives, such as the proposed Media Council, than by the
government, said the PCI resolution.
_________________________________
Published: August 29, 2012 01:51 IST | Updated: August 29, 2012
01:51 IST New Delhi, August 29,
2012
‘No such decision taken by Press Council’
The Press Council of India’s statement that it has resolved to
urge the government to rename it as Media Council and widen its ambit to cover
the television channels and social media was disputed by a member on Tuesday,
saying no such decision was taken.
K.S. Sachidananda Murthy, member of the Council and Resident
Editor of Malayala Manorama daily, said in a statement that he was
“surprised” that the council had issued such a press release. According to the
release, the council at its meeting on Monday resolved to seek more powers and
also for conversion into the Media Council, covering electronic and social
media.
“The Press Council did not take such a decision. The members felt
that such an important step needs to be discussed and it was decided to discuss
the amendments to the Press Council Act at the next meeting of the Press
Council,” Mr. Murthy said.
He has also written a letter to PCI Chairman Justice Markandey
Katju, expressing surprise over the press release issued by the council.
“...it was the general consensus that the question of amendments
to the Press Council Act, including giving more powers to the Council and
bringing electronic and social media under the Media Council would be discussed
at the meeting of the Press Council,” Mr. Murthy wrote in his letter.
Katju stands by statement
However, Justice Katju stood by the council statement that a
resolution was passed. “It [Mr. Murthy’s claim] is not correct. It was a
unanimous decision and he was party to that decision. I don’t know why he is
saying this now,” he said over phone.
____________________________________________________
Published: August 30, 2012 23:56 IST | Updated: August 30, 2012
23:56 IST NEW DELHI, August 30,
2012
Broadcasters, newspapers oppose move to bring TV under PCI umbrella
The Hindu Both news
channels and print newspapers have united to oppose the Press Council of India’s
move to bring the electronic media under its control.
The move seeks to negate the self-regulatory mechanism: NBA
Both news channels and print newspapers have united to oppose the
Press Council of India’s move to bring the electronic media under its control.
On Thursday, the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) said it was
extremely disappointed by the resolution “unilaterally,” released by PCI
chairman Markandey Katju, and “purportedly passed” by the Council on August 27,
which urged the government to amend the law and include broadcast and social
media within its ambit.
“The NBA strongly opposes this move which seeks to negate the
self-regulatory mechanism that has been in force for the last several years and
has had a very real and positive impact in improving broadcasting standards,”
said a statement issued by NBA secretary-general Annie Joseph said. It urged
Justice Katju to “engage himself constructively with print media matters, which
is the mandate he has under the Press Council Act and not to exceed his remit on
commenting upon areas which are outside his jurisdiction.”
Supreme Court’s censure
In fact, NBA president K.V.L. Narayan Rao — who is also executive
vice chairperson of NDTV — says that news broadcasters are more worried about
the Supreme Court’s recent rebuke regarding news channels’ coverage of the 26/11
terror attacks in Mumbai. In its concluding remarks in the Kasab judgement, the
apex court had said that “the mainstream electronic media has done much harm to
the argument that any regulatory mechanism…must come only from within.”
“There is a difference between the Press Council saying something
like this and the Supreme Court saying that, in their view, the self-regulation
mechanism is not good enough,” Mr. Rao told The Hindu.
He felt that the News Broadcasting Standards Authority, set up in
October 2008 under the chairmanship of former Chief Justice of India J.S. Verma,
had “done far more to improve the standard of television news than the Press
Council had done for the print medium.”
The Indian Newspaper Society (INS) has also joined in to oppose
the PCI move to “bestow on itself more powers under the guise of bringing the
electronic media” within its purview.
In a statement on Thursday, INS president Ashish Bagga said:
“Print and electronic media in any case are based on two different formats
altogether, clearly requiring two distinctively separate sets of guidelines…INS
believes that the press in India is time-tested and self-regulated with enough
maturity to continue to play the crucial role of the Fourth Estate of our
vibrant democracy responsibly.”
_____________________________________
Published: August 31, 2012 01:08 IST | Updated: August 31, 2012
01:09 IST August 31, 2012
The medium as messenger
The Supreme Court’s blunt rebuke of television channels which went
into a careless and competitive feeding frenzy while covering the Mumbai 26/11
terror attack is almost entirely justified. However, its concluding remark that
“the mainstream electronic media has done much harm to the argument that any
regulatory mechanism … must come only from within” is misplaced. First, the
reprimand. There is no doubt that the live coverage of 26/11 set a low in TV
journalism with the most basic of norms — objectivity, verification, dispassion
— making way for a heated, overzealous and inconsiderate jumble of words and
images as channels fought each other to ‘break news’ and gather eyeballs. Worse,
there is evidence that at times the frenzied coverage risked the lives of people
trapped in the two Mumbai hotels and endangered the security forces. Transcripts
of phone conversations between the terrorists and their Pakistani handlers
clearly establish that the latter were issuing instructions on the basis of what
they were watching. For instance, the terrorists in Taj Mahal Palace were told
the dome of the hotel had caught fire; those holed up at The Oberoi were
informed that the security forces were strengthening their positions on the
roof.
The Supreme Court is right that, insofar as it risked violating
the right to life of others, such TV coverage cannot be justified under the
right to free expression. However, it is one thing to criticise over-the-top
coverage and quite another to say something that could be interpreted as tacit
endorsement of an external regulatory framework. Despite the occasional
excesses, self-regulation of the broadcast media is the best way of striking a
balance between preserving freedom of expression from state interference and
preventing the abuse of its immense power. News broadcasters are not unaware of
their obligations and the reasonable restrictions on their freedom to report
events. The setting up of the News Broadcasters Association, comprising 45 news
and current affairs channels, with its Code of Ethics and its Red
ressal
Authority to address complaints from those aggrieved, is a significant step in
the right direction. Stung by the criticism of the coverage of 26/11, the NBA
has issued guidelines for reporting in emergency situations, which mandate,
among other things, that no information be “given of pending rescue operations
or regarding the number of security personnel involved or methods employed by
them.” As TV coverage of subsequent incidents has shown, self-regulation is
working reasonably well and there is no reason for external control.
_____________________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3836676.ece?css=print
Published: August 29, 2012 23:18 IST | Updated: August 30, 2012
08:41 IST New Delhi, August 29,
2012
Live TV coverage put national security in jeopardy, says Bench
-
Commandos entering the Taj hotel as terrorists continue firing during the Mumbai attacks on November 27, 2008. Photo: Paul Noronha -
The Hindu Gopal Subramanium (left), representing Maharashtra State Govt and Raju Ramachandran, Amicus Curiae for Ajmal Amir Kasab, soon after the Supreme Court verdict in New Delhi on August 29, 2012. Photo: R.V.Moorthy
‘Security forces’ positions were being watched by collaborators across
border’
Slamming the electronic media for its live coverage of the 26/11
terrorist attacks, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said that by doing so the
Indian TV channels did not serve the national interest or any social cause.
A Bench of Justices Aftab Alam and C.K. Prasad, while confirming
the death sentence on the prime accused, Ajmal Kasab, said the “reckless
coverage… gave rise to a situation where, on the one hand, the terrorists were
completely hidden from the security forces and they had no means to know their
exact positions or even the kind of firearms and explosives they possessed and,
on the other, the positions of the security forces, their weapons and all their
operational movements were being watched by the collaborators across the border
on TV screens and being communicated to the terrorists.”
The Bench said: “Apart from the transcripts, we can take judicial
notice of the fact that the terrorists’ attacks at all the places, in the
goriest details, were shown live on Indian TV from beginning to end, almost
non-stop. All the channels were competing with each other in showing the latest
developments on a minute-to-minute basis, including the positions and the
movements of the security forces engaged in flushing out the terrorists.
“In these appeals, it is not possible to find out whether the
security forces actually suffered any casualty or injuries on account of the way
their operations were being displayed on the TV screen. But it is beyond doubt
that the way their operations were freely shown made the task of the security
forces not only exceedingly difficult but also dangerous and risky.”
Holding that any attempt to justify the conduct of the TV channels
by citing the right to freedom of speech and expression would be “totally wrong
and unacceptable in such a situation,” the Bench said: “Freedom of expression,
like all other freedoms under Article 19, is subject to reasonable restrictions.
An action tending to violate another person’s right to life guaranteed under
Article 21 or putting the national security in jeopardy can never be justified
by taking the plea of freedom of speech and expression.”
Credibility test
“Expressing its anguish, the Bench said: “The shots and visuals
could have been shown after all the terrorists were neutralised and the security
operations were over. But, in that case, the TV programmes would not have had
the same shrill, scintillating and chilling effect and would not have shot up
the TRP ratings of the channels. It must, therefore, be held that by covering
live the terrorists’ attack on Mumbai in the way it was done, the Indian TV
channels were not serving any national interest or social cause. On the
contrary, they were acting in their own commercial interests, putting the
national security in jeopardy. It is in such extreme cases that the credibility
of an institution is tested. The coverage of the Mumbai terror attack by the
mainstream electronic media has done much harm to the argument that any
regulatory mechanism for the media must come only from within.”
______________________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-newdelhi/article3846639.ece
NEW DELHI, September 1, 2012
Child rights panel upset over Modi’s remark
Accusing Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi of trivialising a
grave situation by attributing malnutrition in the State to the behaviour of
teenagers and vegetarianism, the National Commission for Protection of Child
Rights (NCPCR) in a statement released on Friday expressed its shock at the
comment.
Reacting sharply to the Chief Minister’s statement, NCPCR
chairperson Shanta Sinha said, “In an interview to the Wall Street
Journal recently Mr. Modi blamed the growing levels of malnutrition in
Gujarat to figure-conscious girls. Studies on dietary patterns and intake
suggest that far from being a personal choice, vegetarianism is related to the
inability to purchase nutritionally rich animal-based foods such as milk, eggs,
fish and meat and to suggest that the poor women and children of Gujarat are
malnourished as a result of fashion-consciousness is a cruel joke.”
Stating that the NCPCR was looking forward to the Gujarat Chief
Minister taking responsibility for this “dismal situation of gender
disempowerment and inequitable distribution of resources”, she said, “We look to
Mr. Modi to enable implementation of a robust health policy to correct these
imbalances.”
________________________________________
With great online power, comes great responsibility
In a country like India, which has a million issues, the social media
provides its users an opportunity to air views without restrictions. The common
man on the street feels empowered to interact and there is an increase in
awareness of national affairs. This ability -- to be the most democratic tool
for the individual on a daily basis -- has made the social media a power to
reckon with in public discourse in the country. One example is the upsurge of
the centre-of-right views on Twitter that is balancing the center-of-left views
in mainstream media. This balance in perspectives from both ends of the spectrum
--which has been missing for a long time -- assuming it doesn't involve filthy
language, is the true democratization of public opinion in urban India. However,
there are issues that need to be addressed.
Social media per se is rapid and impulsive. As such, the points raised on
platforms such as Twitter tend to be statements that are spontaneous and at
times not necessarily in-depth. The line between glorification and destruction
of individuals is so thin that both can sometimes occur simultaneously! The
addictive nature of the medium is also a cause of concern especially for the
younger generation. Moreover, one of the most complex issues has been the amount
of hatred that is spread around the social media spectrum irrespective of
ideology. Be it the extreme right or the extreme left, spewing of venom and hate
is something that we as a society should not tolerate. Debating ideas and
ideologies is in the ethos of our great cultural heritage; hatred has never been
part of it.
However, censorship is the last thing that's needed in handling such
situations. Suppression of views would only exacerbate the situation at hand.
The level of discretion that comes out of censorship is not pragmatic and could
set a dangerous precedent in restricting views of civil society and journalists.
The best solution to this crisis is to have a process of engagement with the
people who are part of the show, the internet users. More than 80 % of them are
people who are inclusive and tolerant individuals. The ugly talk is derived from
the fringe elements within the community.
The state and organizations such as Twitter needs to engage with the current
users to create a sense of awareness about ways to help block violence and
hatred being abetted online. For example, a campaign could be launched in the
backdrop of the northeast exodus, highlighting the roles played by social media,
both positive and negative, with concrete evidence. In addition, the state could
engage with influential users to help spread the word about mischievous elements
who violate the code of conduct assigned by Twitter or Facebook. The social
media platforms could further enhance their spam mechanisms to levels that
inhibit the flow of hatred amidst various communities. In essence, a
self-regulating mechanism is created, not an imposed one.
The youth will no longer take impositions and agendas lying down. They need
reason and logic and they are daring enough to fight status quo. In such an
environment, there has to be a mature and a streamlined response from the state.
The social media users on their part need to build collaborative walls to
protect their internet space from being polluted by inappropriate
interactions.
As they say, with power comes responsibility. This applies to both the
constituents of social media and its regulators.
_________________________________
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3859742.ece?css=print
Published: September 5, 2012 01:49
“Government should use Internet, social media to counter hate speech”
Agree that legitimate Internet restrictions should not slide into
illegitimate censorship
A key breakthrough emerging from a critical multi-stakeholder
meeting held here on Tuesday on Internet censorship and legitimate state
restrictions during crisis situations was that the government should itself use
the Internet and social media to counter hate speech with comfort speech. Hate
speech on social media has been blamed for triggering riots in Uttar Pradesh,
Assam and Mumbai two weeks ago.
The participants, who included DoT Secretary R. Chandrashekhar, DG
CERT-IN Gulshan Rai, representatives from Google, Facebook, Internet service
providers (ISPs), mobile operators, civil society, technical community and
media, said the government should partner with Internet companies, social media,
ISPs and telcos (through bulk SMSs) to proactively fight fear emanating from
rumours through reassuring communication.
FICCI has proposed the setting up of a Crisis Council consisting
of telecom companies, ISPs, social media along with civil society and the
community, with the ability to act swiftly in a crisis situation.
London example
Offering detailed examples of how the London police successfully
used social media to counter riots, Google and Facebook offered to assist law
enforcement agencies to similarly use the Internet for the protection of the
public during times of crisis.
The discussions also led to an overwhelming consensus on the need
to engage multi-stakeholder groups beyond the industry on the issue.
Participants provided several benefits of such wide-ranging cooperation,
including access to international practices and law, a user perspective,
measures for the need for a threshold before crisis-related Internet blocking
can be ordered and the need to bring in legally justified orders post blocking.
To illustrate that mere blocking of content may not be the best method of
combating hate speech, a suggestion was made to audit the effect of the blocking
undertaken since mid-August in controlling the riots. It was felt that this
information would be useful in guiding the government’s strategy in similar
crisis situations in the future.
Clarity on blocking
A third key agreement was the need for greater transparency and
clarity on who can direct blocking, under what circumstances, and whether those
whose sites have been blocked have recourse to redress.
Dr. Gulshan Rai explained the origins of some of the legal
provisions in the IT Rules, pointing out that they had been based on inputs
provided by the industry itself. He also highlighted that this was the first
time that the government had blocked content which needed to be appreciated when
evaluating its performance.
Welcoming the suggestions, particularly the need for greater
cooperation and transparency, Mr. Chandrashekhar sought a “digest” of the inputs
along with relevant global best practices for the consideration of the
government, while giving an assurance that the government had no intention of
censoring the Internet except in special circumstances and only under lawful
provisions.
Some of the intermediaries sought a greater level of disclosure in
the blocking orders as well as a need for the government to offer recourse to
those whose content is blocked.
Mr. Chandrashekhar acknowledged the benefits of ongoing engagement
with stakeholders, improved communication, increasing awareness and transparency
to principally ensure that legitimate requirements to block content does not
slide into illegitimate censorship.
The next set of discussions will be held on October 4-5 in an
Internet governance conference with multi-stakeholder groups and several foreign
experts on board on a range of issues, including cyber security and hate
speech.
No comments:
Post a Comment