data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2bcd0/2bcd0a859a519ffd69b505f0c1e9b1a5c3a38be0" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2f05d/2f05da95f8c40b5f2df4c5bae14a6b0d26a190a2" alt=""
| ||
Nitish Kumar's “Bihar Shining” campaign | ||
In four years the chief minister has taken annual advertisements placed in newspapers from Rs 4.5 crore to Rs 25.25 crore. MD. ALI presents the findings of RTI activist AFROZ ALAM SAHIL. | ||
Posted Monday, Apr 12 12:01:08, 2010 | ||
| ||
The national media has presented Nitish Kumar, Chief Minister of Bihar as “Vikas Purush” (man of development), but some say that the rosy picture presented by the media about ‘development' of the state is a judiciously managed one.
If one goes by the information provided by the Public Relations Officer of the state department of Information and Public Relations, the Bihar CM has managed state as well as national media, in such a way that they cannot afford to present him in a negative manner. For this purpose he has put the government's advertising budget to good use. This fact has come out in reply to an RTI query filed by Afroz Alam Sahil, an RTI activist and Mass Communication student of Jamia Millia Islamia New Delhi. The Hoot has seen that RTI reply from the state Information and Public Relation department. According to the reply, soon after coming into power, the Nitish Kumar government increased the quantum of advertisement to media by four times to what it was in the previous governments. In just the last four years of Nitish regime, from 2005-09 till February 28, 2010, the state government gave advertisement for around 38,000 odd works and spent Rs 64.48 crore on them whereas in the period of six years the Lalu-Rabri government had spent around just Rs 23.9 crore. As per the RTI document, in 2008-09 alone the state government spent around Rs 25.25 crore on advertisement of both print and electronic media. The manifold increase in the annual spending by the state government on advertisement is worth noting. In 2005-06 (Nitish Kumar came in power in November 2005) the state spending on advertisements was around Rs 4.49 crore. With an increase of around Rs 90 lakh, that expenditure in 2006-07 was Rs 5.4 crore. In 2007-08, there was an increase of Rs 4.25 crore, which brought the expenses to Rs 9.65 crore. And finally, in 2008-09 this yearly increase went up to Rs 15.59 crore, bringing the annual spending on advertisements to Rs 25.25 crore. In 2009-10 till February 28, 2010, around Rs 19.66 crore has been spent on advertisements. On These advertisements highlight the so called developmental works of the state government in the areas of health, minority development, education and socio-economic development, with the titles like "Badalta Bihar" (changing Bihar) "Nitish Kumar Ke Chaar Saal" (four years of Nitish Kumar). Afroz Alam said “the countrywide fame of Nitish has less to do with his work on the ground and more to do with positive coverage that newspapers across the country gave him in lieu of the advertisements…” On the eve of completion of four years of Nitish government the Hindi daily Hindustan had received advertisement worth Rs 37 lakh from The RTI activist pointed out “from the above mentioned data it is quite evident that media did good business in Nitish's regime.” “In spite of taking such a substantial amount of advertising from Nitish government the media organizations never talked about that, this itself proves that they don't want to expose the truth behind much publicized ‘development' of Bihar. Because then they will lose advertisements worth millions”, he said. He drew our attention towards the state advertisement policy-2008. “The state government has made it clear that if at all the work of any media organization is against the interests of the state (euphemism for Nitish regime) then that organization will not be given advertisements; and worst the state government can eliminate that organization from the list of media organizations which will be given advertisements”, he said. The state Advertisement Policy-2008 says that “the Empowered Advertisement Committee keeping in mind the requirement, practicality and the state interests may recommend such newspapers…The Committee shall have the freedom and the competency to delist any listed newspaper /periodical in the interest of the state or work from the approved list.”
Quoting a senior TOI Patna correspondent, who does not want to be named, Afroz Alam pointed out “the day Times of India started reporting about the state government's utter failure in meeting the challenges posed by the Kosi flood (2008), the government started withdrawing advertisements from the English daily. So finally TOI had to switch back to ‘normal' reporting”. Mr. Alam said that when he got to know about the huge state expenditure on advertisements, he contacted media organizations like The RTI activist pointed out that “the effect of these advertisements on media coverage is that if you happen to be anti-Nitish, you will really be lucky if your views or demonstration is covered by the media.” He said that it is quite evident that the state government is more focused on creating a positive image in people's perception with the help of media than doing things on ground. This is the “Bihar Shining” campaign as opposed to the “India Shining” campaign in which BJP-led NDA government spent Rs 88.89 crore. But in a country where the ultimate power lies in the hands of the jan janardhan (general public) it will be interesting to see how much the “Bihar Shining” campaign achieves in the coming assembly election. |
Jamia Teachers’ Solidarity Association
11 April 2010
Batla House ‘Encounter’: Who is the JP Trauma Centre Shielding?
Stop withholding the Truth! Release all Information NOW!
Days after the startling revelation of the post mortem reports of Atif Ameen and Md. Sajid, which conclusively nailed the lie of the Delhi Police claims that the two boys were killed in cross fire, the security establishment has swung into damage control to ensure that no further information is made public. It is to be recalled that the post mortem reports could be made public only through the persistent efforts of RTI activist and Jamia student, Afroze Alam Sahil and the resolute resistance offered by the teachers and students of Jamia as well as other civil rights activists.
While the post mortem reports have made it amply clear that both Atif and Sajid have been shot from close range and possibly in captivity (as illustrated by the injury marks made by blunt force); the reports also raised several questions:
1) How was it that Inspector Sharma, who suffered gunshot wounds which could have easily been treated since none of the vital organs was effected by the shots, allowed to bleed to his death. Why was his hemorrhage not plugged immediately?
2) What were the metallic objects retrieved from the bodies of both Atif and Sajid, which also find mention in the post mortem reports?
3) Why were postmortems on Atif and Sajid’s bodies conducted only on the 22nd September, after full two days had lapsed, whereas that on Inspector Sharma was conducted the following day, on the 20th September?
Indeed, these were some of the key questions that were asked from the JP Trauma Centre in an RTI application filed by Afroze Alam on 23 March 2010. Alam had sought the Clinical treatment report of Inspector Sharma, copies of photographs and videography taken during the post mortem, forensic report and details of all samples and specimens collected from the body.
Responding to the application, the Trauma Centre in a fashion typical of its earlier responses has hid behind certain clauses of the RTI Act. The response received on 10th April 2010 cites its helplessness in providing the information as it falls, according to the Centre, under 8 (1) g and 8 (1) h. These are spurious grounds to keep information vital to the pursuance of truth under cover.
- Clause 8 (1) g says that such information “the disclosure of which would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security purposes” may be withheld. Now we would like to ask, how the publication of Inspector Sharma’s Clinical Reports would endanger someone’s life? Whose identity is the Trauma Centre so insistent on protecting? On whose instructions is it denying the petitioner information about the metallic objects recovered from the bodies of the slain youth?
- Clause 8 (1) h says that “information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders” can be withheld from the petitioner. Trauma Centre is NOT an investigating agency and can therefore not claim on its own that medico legal information will or will not impede investigation. It is clearly acting at the behest of those agencies which fear that the truth is too dangerous to be made public.
We demand that the JP trauma Centre immediately disclose all information. Further, reports such as Firearm Examination report, Ballistic Report, all clinical plates of the three deceased be made public.
Sd/-
Manisha Sethi, Adil Mehdi, Ghazi Shahnawaz, Ahmed Sohaib and others for JTSA
By Mumtaz Alam Falahi, TwoCircles.net,
New Delhi: The Supreme Court yesterday allowed Mohd Shakeel, a post-graduate student of Jamia Millia Islamia and one of the Delhi serial blasts suspects now in jail, to appear in the MA (Economics) examination beginning on April 5 at the university. Shakeel is currently in Sabarmati Jail of Gujarat. He will be brought to Tihar Jail on April 4.
The apex court gave the order on a plea by senior lawyer Prashant Bhushan. A bench headed by Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan ordered Delhi Police to bring Shakeel to Tihar Jail on April 4 so that he could appear in the exam beginning on April 5 till the end of the month.
Among those picked after Batla House encounter in connection with September 2008 Delhi serial blasts Mohd Shakeel and Ziaur Rahman are two Jamia Millia students.
The Jamia Millia authorities had suspended the two students on September 22, 2008, just three days after the Batla encounter (September 19, 2008). It is interesting to note that the university authorities had taken the decision on the basis of the media reports about the students. But soon after, the then VC announced to extend legal help to the arrested students of the university.
In reply to an RTI petition filed by activist Afroz Alam Sahil on August 24, 2009, the university said: “Two students of the University namely Ziaur Rahman, B.A. (Pass) Final year and Mohd. Shakil, M.A. Economics, Final year were suspended by the University Office Order dated 22.9.2008.”
However, the university sent the matter to Discipline Committee when the family of the students questioned the suspension. The Discipline Committee concluded that it had no objection if they sat in the exam. The view of the Discipline Committee was endorsed by the Majlis-i-Muntazimah (Executive Council) of Jamia Millia Islamia held on 15/01/2010.
“Decision on the appeal received from Ms. Saira Bano (sister of Ziaur Rahman) against University’s order dated 22.9.2008 regarding pension/campus ban. The Majlis (EC) considered the decision of the Discipline Committee Annexure-III on the above request and endorsed the same,” reads the Minutes of the Executive Council meeting.