HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: A PERSPERCTIVE  M.KUNHAMAN ( Professor of Economics, University of Kerala ) More MEDIA PRACTICES AND RIGHTS CONSCIOUSNESS IN SOUTH ASIA : A Preface to the Critique T.G. Suresh ( Jawaharlal Nehru University , New Delhi ) Anil G. Nair ( Hindustan Times , New Delhi ) More MEDIA--INSPIRER OR MANIPULATOR? Kurian Pampadi ( Formerly with Malayala Manorama) It is easy to speak volumes about the influence of the media on society rather than quantify the actual influence. It has always been a debating point whether the media exerts any influence in charting the course of human behaviour. Even if there is any influence, it has to be ascertained whether it has been benign or malignant. Goebbels was able to influence the course of history by manipulating the media by blatant lies to endorse the actions of his megalomaniac master Adolph Hitler. We saw the same being repeated in the recent theatre of war in Iraq when we saw the media being manipulated by the Western war machine. The edifice of the justification of war has started to crumble as lies one after another are being exposed. Jurgen Habermas, the German social scientist, have come up with the theory of the refeudalization of the public sphere to the detriment of humans. He theorises that it was the open public forums of the early European settlements that ensured their rights and privileges through public airing of their opinions and grievances. Later, the media like the newspapers took over their place. The newspapers served as public platforms to lay bare their views on vital local, national and international issues. Habermas postulates that today the media has appropriated the public’s right for open forums and manipulate them to sell their own feudal views. Their only agenda is filling their purses. We see now a deadly contest between the print and electronic media to make the best of the situation. While the traditional media has reinvented itself to be more colourful and loud to meet the challenges of the electronic media, we see satellite channels making new forays into the realm of the public to catch their attention. The ordinary day-to-day happenings are not enough grist to their mills. For the newspapers, it is marketing all the way at the expense of public interest. In my 40-odd years as a journalist, I have seen the Manger, Marketing of India Shaving Products in North Eastern India taking over as Marketing Manager of Products of a large media company and on the vice versa, the Space Marketing Manager of a Media Company resigns and joins as Marketing Manager Time of a Satellite television company. For the media the end game is just marketing. Now things have come to a head when one big newspaper brandishing itself as the biggest channel in the region in an attempt to ward of the satellite cannels siphoning a large hunk of the advertising pie, now selling at Rs 10,000 per 10 seconds or Rs 60,000 per minute or Rs 3,66,000 per hour or almost a crore of Rs for a single day! The media is often using hyperbole or larger than life images to drive home its agenda with the tragic result that the people have either become immune to the blow-ups or insensitive to their postures. Its slogan “non-stop kondattam” as in the case of Ktv of the Sun stable doe not touch any of the viewers’ sensitive chords. It is in this context that media pundits have disclaimed any of the influence that media used to have in time past. As for example, the Kerala voters are vertically split between the left and the right with a margin of 4-5 per cent for the last several decades and none of the media blitz has been ale to change the scenario even today. The proliferation of the satellite channels has only added to the fire and smoke. Kerala is a small state but it boasts of 1500 print publications of which nearly 1150 are in alayalam, seven All India Radio stations and an equal number of televisions channels. Is it not an information overload signifying nothing except a cacophony of sounds? This is the sad situation after the elapse of more than 200 years since the passage of the Declaration of the Rights of Man by the French National Assembly in 1789 in the wake of the French Revolution. Just as George Ritzer in his McDonaldization of Society has pointed out, the large sharks among the media are already gobbling up smaller sharks. Globalisation sparks a real McDonaldization of the world. In the days of wars being shown live as “lights, camera, action”, the public are at the receiver’s end. We find the CNN chief accusing the Iraq invasion as Murdoch’s war just as media baron Randolph Hearst advocated the Spanish-American War of 1898. The big media companies do not have the public interest at heart. Too few people control too much. That is what Habermas theorizes as the feudalization f the public sphere. Is there a way out? We can count the good newspapers of the country now. We also find the growing number of public broadcasters and web casters around the world. If the Bosnia war could be contained because of non-stop barrage of e-mails, the Kuwait war was called as the first was riddled by anti-war web-mails. Thousands of anti-war online newspapers raged a fierce war across the world. An alternative Press is growing. AA 2004 survey of US newspapers conducted by an organisation related to the Columbia Graduate School f Journalism, the US dailies circulation declined by 11 percent since 1990, the circulation of alternative newspapers like the Washington City Paper increased by 7.5 per cent. Surprisingly the audience of the three major cable news channels has been flat since 2001! TEACHING OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE USE OF MEDIA Bernd Pflug ( Mahatma Gandhi University )   As with the teaching of any idea, we can teach human rights in two ways: we can teach about them, and we can teach them. While doing the former, we keep a distance to subject and student; this is the typical academic-intellectual approach. However, when we teach human rights, we would like the students to have a profoundly existential experience by relating the topic to her or his life. This second way is probably the better one. This teaching can be complemented by understanding any classroom as part of civil society in which human rights would be practiced without being ‘taught’. This indirect teaching would have perhaps the deepest impact on students, but it would also be the least obvious. The teaching of human rights has to cope with a mix of facts and values. The term ‘right’ itself refers to either. Its attributes in, for instance, the right to social security (Article 22 of the Declaration), or the right to equality before the law (Article 7), or the right to nationality (Article 15), point to an overlapping of morality and legality, made more complex by today’s more economically-related human rights. The teaching of human rights has also to deal with the discussion whether human rights are universal, absolute, or relative. One may follow (or not) Michael J. Perry’s position (The Idea of Human Rights, 1998) that even if no human rights, understood as moral rights, are absolute or unconditional, some human rights, understood as international legal rights, should indeed be absolute. Finally, to the use of media. The teaching of any idea can only gain by picking up case studies from reliable media publications or programmes. At present, I would, for example, teach some human rights by using case studies of France’s recent law on the wearing of head-scarves in public schools, Britain’s “two-year immigration rule’ (under which women who are not British citizens face deportation back to their countries if their marriage breaks down within two years of their arrival in Britain), and Kashmir’s permanent resident status (disqualification) bill. Truly, in these cases my teaching would depend on correct media input. HUMAN RIGHTS, SECURITY AND THE PRESS IN INDIA   Teresa Joseph ( Mahatma Gandhi University ) This paper seeks to examine the coverage of human rights questions in the Indian press, focusing on the mainstream press coverage of specific issues, which are ostensibly of a sensitive nature. Some sections of this paper are based on findings from an earlier study. The mobilisation of human rights is very much dependent on media exposure. The mass media have a very significant role to play in creating an awareness of human rights - not only as a primary source of information on human rights violations, but also by facilitating the necessary publicity for information generated by human rights organisations. In this context, the performance of any media can be evaluated on the basis of the extent of its support for furthering the cause of human rights and in exposing human rights violations. Such reporting sometimes becomes problematic, particularly when covering issues ostensibly having a bearing on national security. The realm of issues ranging from insurgency, and defence to the nuclear question are often considered sacrosanct by the mainstream press and are portrayed from a state security perspective ignoring the fundamental rights of the people. Given the fact that information on these areas are not easily forthcoming from the Government, the issue also involves questions of the right to information.   The report of the International Commission for the Study of Communication Problems has pointed out that there is a widespread tendency on the part of governmental agencies to withhold information on spurious grounds such as ‘national security’, in order to conceal other factors like inefficiency or corruption. At the same time, however, there is also a tendency towards self-censorship on the part of the press in covering such issues.   The Indian press is no exception. There are over 5000 registered daily newspapers in India , which are largely privately owned. The press is an integral part of the political processes of Indian democracy, being a media of communication, information dissemination and public debate on the one hand, and the voice of the establishment on the other. The press has also played an important role in exposing specific issues of human rights violations.   However, so called sensitive issues relating to insurgency, defence policy etc. which are perceived to have a bearing on the country’s national security interests are viewed by the Indian press with caution and portrayed largely from a state-centric perspective, even at the cost of downplaying or even completely ignoring the fundamental rights and concerns of the people. The issue could be viewed in the context of the traditional state centric approach to security, rooted in military security against external (and internal threats) which can be seen in contrast to other wider notions of security which emphasise questions of human rights and social justice.   Security and Defence   For instance, in the case of defence policy, militarisation is an issue of major concern for the question of human rights. Notwithstanding debates between defence and development, there is a growing body of literature on the impact of military expenditure on the economy. As Jean Dreze has pointed out, there is convincing evidence that military expenditure slows down economic growth and reduces public expenditure in social sectors. Studies have shown that increases in non-military expenditure contribute to growth more significantly than increases in military expenditure. High levels of military spending have its impact on the ability of nations to fulfil the basic human rights of its citizens, particularly economic and social rights.   Over the years India has seen an increasing allocation of resources for defence. This has emerged as a result of various factors including political, economic, perceptions of threat, other vested interests and technological imperatives, etc. However, the Annual Reports of the Ministry of Defence provide only the bare minimum information regarding the defence scenario. Even where information is provided by the government, it is often distorted as is the case in revealing military expenditure as detailed in the defence budget. Defence related expenditure such as establishment costs of the Ministry of Defence, cost of border roads organisation, maintenance of paramilitary forces, nuclear weapons development, pension liabilities, etc, are accounted under separate heads of account, thus playing down the actual defence outlay.   During annual debates in Parliament, Governments have frequently resorted to citing National Security reasons for not furnishing detailed information of military expenditure and other defence matters, despite the fact that this is often publicly available outside or even inside the country.   The Parliament’s Standing Committee on Defence has itself pointed out [1987] that except for the media, the entire government machinery, foreign arms manufacturers and institutions like the International Institute for Defence Studies, London , and SIPRI know of planned procurements and acquisitions. A retired army chief had submitted before the PCI Committee on Defence coverage, that most often when national security interests have been pleaded for denial of information, the real cause has been prevention of embarrassment to the establishment.   The media has however reacted passively to this situation. The press has generally refrained not only from providing information on existing capabilities and planned procurements, but also from critical reporting on the questions of increasing militarisation. It is often only the sensational stories regarding defence deals, which gets coverage, sometimes even resulting in major exposes. Even here questions about India ’s continued reliance on defence equipment imports despite its large public sector infrastructure of 8 Public Sector Units and 39 Ordinance factories are often ignored. The implications of militarisation for the economic situation in the country or for regional coexistence are largely ignored.   However, although there seems to be very limited space available for independent reporting on security matters, there are plenty of articles by so-called ‘experts’ based in government funded institutions such as IDSA, or other strategic think tanks or retired army personnel or civil servants which propagate official viewpoints. P.R.Chari, a former member of the Joint Intelligence Committee and former Director of IDSA is on record as having stated that journalists and academics are often influenced to press hard-line causes in the media.   Most often there is a pronounced militaristic bias in the Indian press. Increased defence expenditure is often welcomed or even advocated. Missile gaps are often created and exaggerated, together with illusions of falling back in the arms race in the subcontinent, [by highlighting Pakistan’s arms acquisitions through detailed inventories and comparing its capability with that of India’s] thereby facilitating the process of militarisation.   In keeping with militaristic traditions, in times of conflict, as was the case during the Kargil conflict there is a sensationalised reporting, with its celebration of martyrdom. Rather than highlighting the heavy human costs, media glorified the conflict, inciting a militaristic patriotism. The economic and political fallout of the war and its impact on the people was rarely reflected. Nuclear   Similar was the case in the reporting of India ’s nuclear programme. The implications of nuclear weapons proliferation for humanity have been well documented and in the present context these would range from the economic to environmental and public health issues. Over the years there has generally been a mere reflection of official policy in the Indian press, which has not sought to go beyond the same. Critical reporting of the country’s weapons programme has been at a disadvantage. In fact during the 1990s we have seen how the press coverage of the CTBT debate reflected a vociferous rejection of the treaty by the press and projected a populist, anti-American approach, highlighting issues of state sovereignty, while ignoring the larger questions regarding the mass destruction nature of nuclear weapons or the relevance of a test ban treaty. The nature of the coverage of the CTBT debate, as well as the strong emphasis on Pakistan ’s missile tests and their capability to hit Indian cities, together with calls for acceleration of India ’s missile programme, could all be seen as having served to create an atmosphere conducive to testing nuclear weapons.   While at the policy level India had consistently argued against nuclear weapons and the concept of deterrence, the 1998 nuclear tests were projected by a jubilant Indian press as having secured for India legitimate international status and scientific achievement. There was a legitimisation of deterrence and the role of nuclear weapons in providing stability. The complete turnaround in the press on India signing the CTBT reflected Government perspectives.   Here again, despite the existence of voices of dissent in the country, these were very much marginalised in the mainstream press. While opinion pages did reflect some amount of dissent, the coverage largely reflected the priorities of the press, which ignored the mass destructive nature of nuclear weapons, the economic costs of nuclearisation, the long term consequences to the environment and public health resulting from physical processes involved in manufacturing these weapons, the lack of command and control systems and its resulting dangers, etc. [According to a scientific study a mere 15 kt bomb, equivalent to what the US dropped on Hiroshima would cause between 1,50,000 to 8,50,000 short term casualties if exploded over Mumbai]   Here, it should also be noted that it was not just criticism of the nuclear weapons programme which was taboo to the India press. Even the coverage of the issue of nuclear safety with its very explicit grave implications for humanity reflected similar tendencies. India ’s nuclear establishment has always taken pride in the country’s ‘safety record’ with regard to its nuclear facilities. However over the years, there have been a number of near accidents and other hazards at nuclear facilities, which have received little attention. There have been informal reports of leaks and fires caused by failing and worn out equipments, of unusually high levels of radioactivity around reactor sites, of nuclear waste being dumped in the ocean and local water tables, safety violations in reactors, staff being locked up in sealed rooms as reactors were started up, villagers being brought in to clean up radioactive spills and contract workers being forced to work in high areas of radioactivity with little or no protective gear. Dhirendra Sharma, who has written extensively on India’s atomic power projects has stated that over 300 incidents of a serious nature have occurred, causing radiation leaks and physical damage to workers.   Former AERB Chairman A.Gopalakrishnan has pointed out that no pressurized heavy water reactor in the world operates with as ‘obsolete’ and ‘unsafe’ testing as at Rajasthan and Madras . At the BARC complex in Trombay underground pipelines carrying radioactive waste within the campus have contaminated tons of subsoil. There are over 2 million tons of liquid waste stored in tanks that are reportedly leaking because of aging corrosion and faulty welding. There have been reports of the disastrous effects of uranium mining on people living near these mines. There have also been reports that workers at these mines and the extraction plant in Jaduguda and the Nuclear Fuel Complex in Hyderabad are not adequately protected from radiation intake and external exposure, while radioactive waste is dumped amidst tribal villages of Jaduguda. Despite these reported hazards in nuclear safety, the standard refrain of officials is to outrightly deny any incident or to downplay the magnitude of issues – referring to them as incidents rather than accidents.   Attempts by the BARC officials to prevent the release of negative information regarding its performance have been a part of its functioning since the very origin of the atomic energy programme. The Government does not permit access to any of its records in this regard, and the imposition of secrecy by the 1962 AE Act and the Official Secrets Act has made it almost impossible to obtain documentary evidence. Critics claim that issues of nuclear safety are linked to national security so as to cover up the departments lapses in matters relating to safety. There have also been instances of harassing and victimising journalists who have attempted to go against the grain   However, notwithstanding such instances in reporting, over the years there has been a general acceptance of the Government’s statements on nuclear issues in the Indian press, offering hardly any analysis or dissenting views. There have even been instances where western criticism of Indian performance in the nuclear energy sector being accused as prejudiced analysis. In the euphoria of the 1998 nuclear tests, the Indian press ignored reports of the people of Khetolai village complaining of insomnia, nose bleeds, nausea etc while repeating Vajpayes statement that even had there been any trouble, we should learn to sacrifice as national security is above all considerations. There has also been barely any discussion on the occupational hazards and environmental and public health impact of nuclear waste. The small but persistent anti nuclear movement in the country which has sought to publicise such issues has received very little space in the mainstream Indian press. The press has helped to exclude issues of nuclear safety from the public agenda, narrowing the scope of debate on an issue of gravest consequences.   Compounding matters further is the recent Supreme Court verdict on the question of the right to information vis a vis public safety from radiological and industrial risks. A 1996 report of the AERB had documented 130 incidents inbvolving nuclear safety hazards, PUCL and Bombay Sarvodaya Mandal had sought judicial intervention to make the report public. However the Supreme Court has ruled that safety reports on India’s nuclear power plants can be withheld from the public by the Govt on grounds of national security. According to the judgement, while citizens had a right to access government information under the constitution, this was subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of national security. Scientists point out that knowledge of the problems concerned would not reveal the nuclear programme potential or be detrimental to national security, as all the existing power plants in India are based on foreign designs and information about those designs is freely available. But revealing these could provoke concern among local residents which is most feared. Nevertheless, such developments only serve to further tighten the knots of official as well as unofficial censorship on such crucial issues relating to the right to life, liberty, public health and environment. Kashmir The Coverage of the human rights situation in Kashmir is another case in point reflecting the dilemmas and prejudices of the Indian press. Balraj Puri has succinctly pointed out that “one can trace the beginning of the Kashmir problem and its growth to its present dimensions to the denial to the people of the state of civil liberties, democracy and human rights including the rights to freedom of speech, rights to protest and form an opposition party, right to vote and to elect a government of their choice.” Indian civil rights groups as well as international human rights organisations have documented in detail specific aspects of the human rights situation in the valley, particularly since the late 1980s. These reports give detailed accounts of the innumerable instances of security excesses, the militancy in the Valley, and the plight of civilians caught between the security forces and the militants. Although the situation has seen some improvement in the recent past, according to Ministry of Home Affairs data, levels of violence are not absent but rather similar to that prior to 1999. (Kargil) [In 2003, J&K saw 808 civilian fatalities 381 security personnel and 1526 terrorists.] In the earlier years, the Government of India generally denied all allegations of human rights violations and the so-called security excesses were termed mere propaganda by Pakistan and the militants of Kashmir in order to defame the country’s security forces. Human rights activists within the country were even maligned as anti-national. However, under pressure from national and international human rights groups, the govt began to occasionally reveal details of action taken against erring security personnel. However, it continues to adhere to the position that such eventualities were rare and that human rights violations in the Valley were largely the work of militant groups aided by Pakistan.   A study of the Indian press coverage of Kashmir finds a general reflection of such postures. The struggles of the people of Kashmir have been largely identified as part of Pakistan’s proxy war. The denial of democratic rights and alienation has been ignored, reducing the issue to that of a territorial conflict, a national security issue and that of cross border terrorism. More importantly the severe socio-economic hardships of the people, the high levels of unemployment and corruption, and the failure of development funds reaching the masses, besides the rigging of elections are also largely ignored. Balraj Puri has pointed out that alternative viewpoints on the report of the Regional Autonomy Committee [which had evolved a consensus for reconciling interests and aspirations of all diversities of the multi ethnic state] were blacked out in the press, which only paid attention to the official perspective. As the developments in the valley are portrayed in the framework of national security, the loss of lives of security personnel and militants are highlighted, quoting government sources, while the loss of civilian life and property and human rights violations by the security forces is barely given a passing reference. Reports of human rights violations by the state have even been denounced as propaganda by antinational forces. [while the same reports critical of Pak are quoted verbatim] Violations by militants are however highlighted. Similarly, the condemnation by other countries of human rights violations in Kashmir and their calls for the respect of the rights of the people including the right of self-determination is very often suppressed in the Indian press. In her book, Kashmir: A Tragedy of Errors, Tavleen Singh has gone so far as to state that the press was the main reason why the alienation of Kashmir began. It has often been pointed out that reporting on Kashmir is not an easy task with the press being pressurised by militant factions as well as the Govt and security forces. However, there also appears to be a policy of self-censorship whereby anything that is critical of the state and security forces does not find its way into the press. While recent years have seen much more reporting on Kashmir in quantitative terms, these reports continue to reproduce official versions of the situation, without any change in the traditional framing of news. As we have seen there is evidently a policy of official as well as unofficial censorship in reporting issues having a bearing on national security notwithstanding the fact that these issues could also have serious implications for human rights. This brings into focus, the larger questions regarding the very notions of security and the need for a reconceptualisation of the same in the larger interest of human rights. The denial of any information that is basic to the protection of human rights in the name of national ecurity, whether it be by official or unofficial censorship, is antithetical to fundamental democratic values. The Johannesberg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information upholds the right to information on national security as part of the basic right to know. Legitimate restrictions are only those that demonstrably protect a country’s existence or territorial integrity. But states cannot categorically deny information on all aspects of national security. (keralamonitor.com) ENOC LUBRICANTS ATTRACTS THE ATTENTION OF GCC VISITORS     Dubai 29 March 2004 As a result of its first participation in the Dubai International Boat Show, ENOC Lubricants, marketers & suppliers of ENOC lubricants in the UAE, saw an increasing interest from GCC visitors who attended the show. “In addition, the show has led us into discussions with three major UAE boat suppliers,” said Hussain Sultan, Group Chief Executive and Board Member. “We hope these talks will materialize into business opportunities.” At the exhibition, at which ENOC was the only lubricants brand showcased, EPPCO lubes also met with a large number of existing and potential end users including boat owners, engineers and maintenance providers. “All showed a great deal of interest in ENOC products with the stand receiving up to 50 visitors a day. ENOC was at the show to expand its presence into the important marine leisure sector. “The leisure marine and marina industries are growing substantially in the UAE with more than 5,000 new berths being added to the existing capacity,” said Sultan. “This will most certainly drive demand for leisure marine lubricants across the country.”   LONDON CALLING: ETIHAD AIRWAYS ANSWERS Dr Ahmed bin Saif al Nahyan, chairman of Etihad, with HE Richard Makepeace, the British Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates (UAE).   First European destination for the national airline of the UAE  (Abu Dhabi, April 2004) : Etihad Airways, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), has launched its first direct flights between Abu Dhabi, capital of the UAE, and London.  The launch (March 28, 2004) marked the first flights into Europe from the new carrier, and its fifth destination after Amman, Beirut, Colombo and Damascus. Flights to Bangkok launch on April 2, 2004, with the airline targeting as many as 16 destinations by the end of the year.   Dr Ahmed Bin Saif Al Nahyan, chairman of Etihad, led more than 200 officials of both national governments and business leaders at the inauguration of the flight. He said: “It is fitting that Etihad’s first flights into Europe are to London, as there is a longstanding trade relationship between the UK and the UAE.  It is also an important step in the continuing economic development of the UAE and its capital of Abu Dhabi. “We will continue to expand our services as we acquire new aircraft and new routes. Etihad’s growth in the last few weeks has been exponential, thanks to the addition of routes into the Indian Sub-continent, Europe, and the Far East, and this growth will continue through the rest of the year.” HE Richard Makepeace, the British Ambassador to the UAE, was present for the launch celebration, and was one of the first dignitaries to fly on the new service. He said: “Continuing links between both countries, as well as increased tourism traffic have made this route a natural choice.    “From a commercial basis, the ongoing initiatives by the UAE government to encourage tourism in this country have been matched by moves in the commercial sector to develop the infrastructure.  “The direct link to London recognises the continuing economic opportunities in the UAE, as well as the increasing contact between business, governments and the peoples of both countries.” Etihad’s London route will commence with five flights a week, but will increase in frequency over the coming months. The flights will operate to and from Heathrow’s Terminal 3, with its easy access to connecting flights and its efficient ground connections to the City. In addition to its existing fleet of two widebody Airbus 300-200 aircraft, the airline has recently acquired an Airbus 340-300 aircraft.     In other Etihad developments, the airline launches its Bangkok service in early April and routes to Bombay and New Delhi are scheduled to begin by the end of August and December respectively.		Home