Once known as a Naxalite sympathizer and a theoretician for the Maoists, K. Balgopal has deserted the extreme Left ideology and turned a human rights crusader. He is now a prominent face of the human rights movement in the country. He has spent 27 years in defending civil rights cases. He was born in 1952 in Telengana. He has done his M.Sc (Mathematics) and a PhD from Regional Collage of Engineering (NIT), Warangal under Kakatiya University.
In an exclusive hour-long interview, K Balgopal spoke to Sudarshan Chhotoray issues ranging from Kandhamal violence to current changing trends in Naxalite movement and human rights. Excerpts:
India Insight: Maoists claimed to have killed Swami Laxananda Saraswati ?
K Balgopal- Claims true, not just they have killed, they have issued a detailed statement. There is no reason to doubt even with the terms of their politics, it is justified act or not they have to prove it. Where they do not have any organization and movement, how can they justify this act? Only where, they have built up resistance movement and violent anti-repression campaign, they have justifications. Simply coming from outside and killing a Swami is not justified. After December 24th incident in Kandhamal, they must have realized of a possible backlash. How could they go for such an act is highly questionable?
II. Who is responsible for Kandhamal carnage?
KB: This is Sangh Parivar. It has become a tendency after Gujarat killings. The strategy has been to use a section of poorest section of people dalits or Adivasis against religious minorities - Muslims or Christians. These backward class people are known militants. Very cynically Sangh Pariwar had trained militant elements among adivasis against Muslim traders. Here roped in local traders communities and adivasis against dalit section of society and those are Christians using- tribal resentments against Paan community.
In Chhatisgarh ‘Salwa Judum’ is being used as an instrument by BJP government there to win over tribals and to make deep inroads into the tribal region only threatening and terrorizing people.
This practice gets rolled when BJP in power, so that administrative mechanism will be part of their programme. So, that they can spread hatred and polarize communities on religious line.
II It seems Maoists have departed from their traditional position?
KB We have been watching the changing scenario. The path which was supposed for the mass movement departed long ago since mid-80s. Instead of strengthening people’s unity and movement, action of underground activists strengthened. The dis-oriented social action has not completely off from the people but not quite close to people. Armed actions without people and struggle only by the armed cadres cannot be sustained for a long time. Baring few areas of Telengana and other areas where there is less police repression, armed activities is growing. The presence of Guerrilla groups in Orissa, Chhatisgarh and other states which are only the extension of Andhra Pradesh – limited to only mass actions, rather than organized people’s movement.
II Have Naxalites lost direction?
KB They need to seriously re-think in which direction they should go? And they ought to be, the question here is where it leads, leads to people’s fight against economic globalization, against monolithic society preached by Sangh Pariwar as a part of greater Hindu Rashtra etc. There are also divided among parliamentary parties. There are few parties, who want to be B-team of BJP also. Few among them are regional groupings. The political skyline is clear. Within Parliament, CPI (M) is seriously waging a struggle against anti-people policies of the government and outside parliament Maoists are waging war against anti-people policies and exploitation. However, Maoists need to redefine their role.
II. It has been alleged that you have defected from traditional Naxalite line?
KB. Not at all, we represented the civil rights movement, and largely our activities were and now limited to human rights violation. Yes, there was an impact of Naxal movement in earlier days, where in Telengana and especially in Warangal the movement was so strong led by people of that area. Now they are almost driven out from Telengana villages. There was a time when peasantry were organized under Ryot Coolie Sangham, youth were united and radical youth league (RYL), they were working to strengthening people's movement. During the time in mid 90s we had started serious deliberations on civil rights movement vis-à-vis Naxalite movement and a section of APCLC had decided to concentrate on human rights movement.
II. What was the need for the formation of HRF?
KB: I was active and part of APCLC (Andhra Pradesh Civil Liberties Committee) since its formation in the year 1981.I was its general secretary since 93 for 15 years upto 98. Earlier APCLC was concentrated in four districts. During my tenure, we had extended it to all over the state. But after mid 90s we had felt that we are not going in right path, only when Naxalites are killed we were working on fact finding committees. There was a serious debate among us- what are we doing? Why are we doing these? Whether our work will limit to repression on Naxal movement and struggle against repression on Naxal movement etc.The consensus among us was- we should maintain the identity of rights movement and thus formed Human Rights Forum (HRF). Basically, to strengthen and propagate the principle of democracy in the state, society and culture and that was the central tax. Whoever fights to defend democracy and part of the principal task fighting against state repression? Talking in terms of democratic value even by Maoists, sometimes we felt not available; their activity and conduct should be in conformity in democratic value. At HRF, we have tried to expand the definition, meaning and role of rights movement in the country.
II. How would you describe the characters of the state and its apparatus?
KB: We have not found any meaning, when the state in the name of democracy has become judicious, upholding constitutional obligations, has not become partisan, holding elections has become impartial etc. Sometimes we have found, state has become a police state and repressive without any justification. We feel, support the state until it is not a police state, oppose when it is oppressive and repressive. Often, we have seen state is becoming a power enjoyed by a selective few, to some extent anti-people and in- responsive towards its citizens.
II. How do you compare a few recent people’s movements like NBA with Naxalite movement?
KB: Both have achievements in terms of exposer, longetivity, refraining the state from hands in globes with local landlords, highlighting the issues of tribal exploitation, drawing the attention of intellectuals and attracting youth against exploitation of men by men and by state etc. But, neither of them has succeeded in reversing statuary policies of the state, which is anti-people. Pushing back policies and policy decisions not to harm citizens of their legitimate rights. Still there is a long way to go on forcing the state not to go with SEZ policies, globalization, double digit growth, criminalization and corruption of police, communalization of the state etc.
II. How do you comment on development with industrialization and vis-à-vis displacement?
KB. Industrialization issue comes with massive land acquisition policy and a statutory rehabilitation policy. Public purpose has not been properly defined in the present land acquisition policy. State is indiscriminately acquiring land for any company and private industries without justifying the real purpose and without providing sufficient compensation to the land oustees. Gross violation of human rights of project oustees are seen every where.
It has become an increasing tendency to acquire more land without citing the actual need. Why do they need so much of land! Where minimum was the need to set up an industry, project or Air Port? We don’t have a comprehensive policy to minimize land requirement, scaling down displaced people and land management. Livelihoods options of poor, indigenous and minority sections those who have no voice are squeezed and contained. Land for land and adequate compensation and above all minimizing the requirement of land and displaced persons should be the policy guideline.
Ends
No comments:
Post a Comment