On a trip to Lahore once, I was struck by the cultural similarities between my hosts and myself. We liked the same food, lived in similar surroundings, and shared the same jokes. It was an altogether friendly experience, separated by a border. On a similar trip to the Northeast, I realised how different I was from the local population. Despite the cordiality, the cultural and ethnic connection of my hosts was closer to China. Yet, I felt gratified that our differences were not a source of alienation, and that the boundaries of nation states were in fact not cultural, social or culinary boundaries.
But through most of India, the Northeast evokes an ambivalent response. Nido Tania’s death is just one of many incidents that has again focussed attention on racism and public attitudes to both foreigners and Indian citizens. Last year, when two women of Chinese descent from Singapore were molested in Goa, the police delayed the registration of their complaint with the excuse that they thought the women were from the Northeast. Two years ago — triggered by an SMS hate campaign — many Northeast residents were forced out of Karnataka back to their home States fearing racist attacks. Only when the Rapid Action Force was deployed in Bangalore did the exodus stop. By then 30,000 people had already left the city. Similar campaigns by Sena activists in Maharashtra have led to marches against Bihari outsiders. Despite the media uproar, little or no action is taken and race issues are brushed aside as being insignificant.
Different responses
However, racism outside the country elicits an altogether different response. When actor Shahrukh Khan is frisked by American immigration authorities, it is racial profiling at its worst, and causes a diplomatic crisis.
Four years ago when Indian students — mainly of Punjabi origin — were the target of racist attacks in Australia, incensed and outraged protests were staged against Australians, both in India and abroad. Calls were made for diplomatic ostracism and a boycott of Australian universities. Had those students been of Northeastern origin, would the protest have been as muscular and vehement? Why is the Indian outraged at racism directed at him abroad, and not at home?
Psychologists will say that the Indian’s deep-seated inferiority is rooted in a past of subjugation, the colonial despair of feeling second rate. But a deeper resentment now emerges as a form of by-polar urbanism where protection of self and turf is paramount, and always guarded against any invasion. Unfortunately, when the insularity of neighbourhoods is viewed as a positive attribute, Ugandan women in a Delhi mohalla will continue to be seen as an unacceptable intrusion in middle-class urban culture; as will the Danish and other Europeans, if they abandon the tour buses and start walking down the local streets. The assertion of Indian racist self-worth is always more palatable when weighed against foreign cultural comparisons.
Will then, Indians of African descent, the Siddis, settled in Gujarat, Maharashtra and Karnataka ever be truly accepted as Indians? Would Ugandans, if they settled down in India, ever become citizens with full rights, just the way 12,000 Indians have in Uganda? If Indians from the Northeast are not accepted into the mainstream, does that then weaken the case for Arunachal Pradesh being an integral part of India? If indeed mainstream India is unwilling to accept the Northeasterner’s Indianness, why then is the Kashmiri’s position questioned? Is the Indian Kashmiri’s applause for Pakistan at a cricket match as much a betrayal as a resident Indian supporting the Indian team against England in England? The answers probably lie in the larger issue of who is an Indian anyway.
Many Hindus still believe that they are the true settlers of India. Muslims, they maintain, became settlers only through invasion, and Christians through missionary imposition. On the other hand, Muslims — and many Hindus — believe that cultural assimilation is the true strength of the country; while some regard aboriginals as the only original inhabitants of India. Whatever the merits of the debate, once cultural and ethnic contamination — rather than purity — is accepted as the overriding theme of Indian identity, questions of who is Indian become redundant.
Till then, Assamese women will continue to be groped on the metro; at bus stops, Mizo nurses on their way home will be seen by many passing motorists as easy prey. Africans anywhere will be presumed to be drug addicts and suppliers. The enforcing of such stereotypes is a cultural flaw, an acid test for an urban culture that oscillates between modernity, tradition and barbarity, often in the same breath. However long a Ugandan woman may live in a Delhi mohalla , or an Arunachal girl in a Bangalore suburb, they will not be invited to join the residents’ welfare association. Sadly, the stamp of “Resident Alien” is permanently fixed on their ethnicity. The Indian is an unforgiving and ruthless host, living by the rules of some imaginary past, uncomfortable in the rapidly changing present, and completely disconnected with his future in the city.
If anything, the insular state of urban life demands a serious look at outsiders by those who consider themselves insiders. Is a lack of assimilation a threat to cultural integrity, or is the current state of racial exclusion essential for religious and ethnic purity? The answer may shape India’s urban future.
Racism, our dirty secret
Article 14 of the Constitution deals with 'Right to Equality'. It tells us with the straightest of faces that 'The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.' The very following sentence in the country's operations manual is Article 15(1) that deals with 'Fundamental Rights'. It says even more pithily, 'The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.'
Last Friday, Delhi high court pulled up the police and the state government for lack of progress on the case of 19-year-old Nido Tania, a student from Arunachal Pradesh, who died in the city following a racist attack.
Now, you can take your pick from all the constitutional categories mentioned above to illustrate how the real world strays from the scripture when it comes to equality before the law or when reassuring that the state is absolutely against any kind of discriminatory behaviour on its part. But with Nido's death, the result of injuries received after aracist attack, let us stick to the statutory discrimination on grounds of race.
Much has been made of how 'mainland Indians' look upon Indians from the northeastern region bearing Mongoloid features. In Jaipur last month, a schoolteacher told a woman from a publishing house how she first thought she was Japanese and was impressed with her fluent Hindi. The teacher had no intention to offend the lady from Delhi who is originally from Manipur. Indeed, her intention was to compliment her in a strange, roundabout way. And, even as i was shocked, no offence was taken by the Manipuri lady.
Discrimination has two components to it: one, recognising the distinction between, say, people bearing Mongoloid features and those bearing Caucasoid features, an ability that is as helpful as that of being able to differentiate between a mosque and a temple, or an Audi and a Skoda. And two, there's discrimination where the ability to make a distinction leads to prejudice.
It is this second variety of discrimination that needs to be — and can be — weeded out. This is possible not by striking at the proverbial source of the problem — 'by changing the social mindset' — but by addressing the problem at the spot where prejudicial discrimination comes to be redressed: before the law.
Almost two years before Nido's death, 19-year-old Loitam Richard from Manipur was found dead in his hostel room in Bangalore. The local police first employed Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code to describe death 'under mysterious circumstances' that didn't rule out murder, accidental death or suicide. Later, the hostel supervisor filed a fresh complaint against two fellow students who reportedly beat up Richard the night before his body was found. The police then filed the case under Section 302 (murder) of the IPC.
The tardy gathering of evidence, compounded by the initial suspicion that 'the northeast boy' was a drug-user and his death was caused by an overdose, was standard operational procedure. Richard was found dead in April 2012. The case is yet to reach the courts. And since the incident didn't take place in, say, Australia, the media barely noticed. In any case, there is no 'consul general of Bangalore' to haul up and grill in television studios.
The law and order machinery across India is dysfunctional. But added to this is selective dysfunction — along socio-economic, caste, religious, regional and racial lines. The police, irrespective of what the Constitution says about legal recourse for 'everyone', behave differently when the complainant is from a slum and when he is from a high-rise. A similar selective res-ponse holds true when it comes to complainants from northeast bearing physical features considered by far too many Indians, law enforcers included, as 'un-Indian', which in turn are hitched to stereotypes such as drug use and promiscuity.
This is what happened when the brutal rape and murder of Thangjam Manorama in 2004 in Manipur by some armymen led to a commission of inquiry whose report was never released and no perpetrators punished. This is what happened with investigations and subsequent (lack of) legal proceedings in the Loitam Richard case. This is what is happening with investigations in theNido Tania case, where the Delhi high court has slammed the police for failing to even submit the victim's autopsy report more than a week after his death.
As a nation, we are hardwired to see racial prejudice only where Indians are victims and where 'white people' are perpetrators. But racism against Indians by Indians thrives. And neither is it confined to the attitudinal behaviour of 'mainland Indians' towards 'northeasterners', the latter also capable of their very own brand of xenophobia.
For the 'social mindset' to change, the law must first treat, and be seen treating, crimes — including non-racist crimes — against northeast Indians seriously. It is how law enforcers deal with cases in which ethnic or racial minorities are victims and complainants that will determine whether India confines itself to benign discrimination. Until then, constitutional exceptions will continue to prove a shameful rule.
Racism, our dirty secret
Article 14 of the Constitution deals with 'Right to Equality'. It tells us with the straightest of faces that 'The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.' The very following sentence in the country's operations manual is Article 15(1) that deals with 'Fundamental Rights'. It says even more pithily, 'The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.'
Last Friday, Delhi high court pulled up the police and the state government for lack of progress on the case of 19-year-old Nido Tania, a student from Arunachal Pradesh, who died in the city following a racist attack.
Now, you can take your pick from all the constitutional categories mentioned above to illustrate how the real world strays from the scripture when it comes to equality before the law or when reassuring that the state is absolutely against any kind of discriminatory behaviour on its part. But with Nido's death, the result of injuries received after aracist attack, let us stick to the statutory discrimination on grounds of race.
Much has been made of how 'mainland Indians' look upon Indians from the northeastern region bearing Mongoloid features. In Jaipur last month, a schoolteacher told a woman from a publishing house how she first thought she was Japanese and was impressed with her fluent Hindi. The teacher had no intention to offend the lady from Delhi who is originally from Manipur. Indeed, her intention was to compliment her in a strange, roundabout way. And, even as i was shocked, no offence was taken by the Manipuri lady.
Discrimination has two components to it: one, recognising the distinction between, say, people bearing Mongoloid features and those bearing Caucasoid features, an ability that is as helpful as that of being able to differentiate between a mosque and a temple, or an Audi and a Skoda. And two, there's discrimination where the ability to make a distinction leads to prejudice.
It is this second variety of discrimination that needs to be — and can be — weeded out. This is possible not by striking at the proverbial source of the problem — 'by changing the social mindset' — but by addressing the problem at the spot where prejudicial discrimination comes to be redressed: before the law.
Almost two years before Nido's death, 19-year-old Loitam Richard from Manipur was found dead in his hostel room in Bangalore. The local police first employed Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code to describe death 'under mysterious circumstances' that didn't rule out murder, accidental death or suicide. Later, the hostel supervisor filed a fresh complaint against two fellow students who reportedly beat up Richard the night before his body was found. The police then filed the case under Section 302 (murder) of the IPC.
The tardy gathering of evidence, compounded by the initial suspicion that 'the northeast boy' was a drug-user and his death was caused by an overdose, was standard operational procedure. Richard was found dead in April 2012. The case is yet to reach the courts. And since the incident didn't take place in, say, Australia, the media barely noticed. In any case, there is no 'consul general of Bangalore' to haul up and grill in television studios.
The law and order machinery across India is dysfunctional. But added to this is selective dysfunction — along socio-economic, caste, religious, regional and racial lines. The police, irrespective of what the Constitution says about legal recourse for 'everyone', behave differently when the complainant is from a slum and when he is from a high-rise. A similar selective res-ponse holds true when it comes to complainants from northeast bearing physical features considered by far too many Indians, law enforcers included, as 'un-Indian', which in turn are hitched to stereotypes such as drug use and promiscuity.
This is what happened when the brutal rape and murder of Thangjam Manorama in 2004 in Manipur by some armymen led to a commission of inquiry whose report was never released and no perpetrators punished. This is what happened with investigations and subsequent (lack of) legal proceedings in the Loitam Richard case. This is what is happening with investigations in theNido Tania case, where the Delhi high court has slammed the police for failing to even submit the victim's autopsy report more than a week after his death.
As a nation, we are hardwired to see racial prejudice only where Indians are victims and where 'white people' are perpetrators. But racism against Indians by Indians thrives. And neither is it confined to the attitudinal behaviour of 'mainland Indians' towards 'northeasterners', the latter also capable of their very own brand of xenophobia.
For the 'social mindset' to change, the law must first treat, and be seen treating, crimes — including non-racist crimes — against northeast Indians seriously. It is how law enforcers deal with cases in which ethnic or racial minorities are victims and complainants that will determine whether India confines itself to benign discrimination. Until then, constitutional exceptions will continue to prove a shameful rule.
New measures to ensure safety of Northeast people in DelhiDelhi Police Commissioner B.S. Bassi on Saturday announced the constitution of a Special Cell to monitor cases involving residents of Northeast and several other new initiatives undertaken by the police .
The new cell would be supervised by a Deputy Commissioner of Police with office in Nanakpura, he said.
“Kime Kaming, who hails from the Northeast and is posted as DCP (Fourth Battalion), will supervise the unit under the close supervision of Joint Commissioner Robin Hibu,” he said adding that the Cell was formed to coordinate the efforts of the police in ensuring the safety and security of the vulnerable people hailing from the Northeastern States.
It is learnt that the new cell would comprise around 15 police officers who will remain in touch with the local police of the areas where such crimes will be reported as well as the governments of the Northeast States and even investigate a case if the need arises.
Mr. Bassi also listed out other initiatives for the Northeastern residents such as the 1093 number helpline which, he said, will have five lines in the control room. Acknowledging that there was a sense of concern among people after the incident in Lajpat Nagar last month which led to the death of a teenager from Arunachal Pradesh, Nido Tania, he added that focus will be on preventive policing as well.
The Delhi Police have narrowed down certain pockets in Munirka and Dwarka where a large number of people from the region live.
“I would also like to reassure those who are from the Northeast that the police is committed to ensure safety of all vulnerable groups, particularly those who come from the Northeast ,” he said.
The Commissioner said that a special cell and a helpline number has also been set up for foreign nationals residing in Delhi.
“We have also set up a Special Cell which will address the grievances of foreign nationals. The chief coordinator of this cell will be Joint Commissioner of Police Mukesh Meena and a helpline number 1098 and a mobile one 08750871111 can be contacted by distressed foreigners for seeking our help,” he said.
From the discomfort zone: Are we racists?
Death resulting from racism is even more painfully shameful in a heterogeneous country like India. We can only empathise with Nido Taniam’s parents. We pride ourselves about India’s ‘unity in diversity’ and in being the world’s most spiritual society, but in the face of regional discrimination in everyday life, everything becomes hogwash.
A colleague of mine who visited Kolkata on research work told me recently that after a wonderful dinner at a Park Street restaurant, she spoke appreciatively to the restaurant manager when he approached her. The manager was very happy, and asked where she had come from. She replied, “Bangalore”. The next words he whispered shocked her. “Kolkata could be better if there were no indecent Biharis spoiling the city.” The irony of the whole situation was that she was from Bihar.
Having grown up as a Bengali in West Bengal, I can vouch for such culturally racist sentiments. Marwaris are offensively referred to as Mero, Biharis as Khotta, Oriyas as Ure and all South Indians as Madrassis. When I look at other states, similar codifications apply. North-Easterners are Chinkis; Kerelites are Kurkurias; in Karnataka, the derogatory words for Tamilians are Konga or Pandi; Tamilians call Andhraites Kolty and Kannadigas Kalli, and all North Indians as Setu. Whereas the word bhaiyya is respectful in North India, for states south of the Vindhyas, it’s a belittling reference to North Indians.
From retail distributors in Pune, I’ve heard gripes about the alleged parochial arm-twisting in Maharashtra that has frightened away Biharis — the very people who are their low-cost labour base. It seems workers from Bihar are very sincere, hardworking and dedicated. They’d come without families, and distributors gave them room and board next to the godown where several of them stayed together. They were willing to work day and night, whenever required. Local distributors unhappily said that Maharashtra is not allowing outsiders to come because of high local unemployment. They also say that as locals have to return to their families at night, distributors don’t have the all-time loading-unloading facility any longer. Whatever may be the business implication for the distributors, the situation amounts to preventing those who belong to Bihar from excersing their fundamental right to work anywhere in India. At the same time, it is exploitation of labour and social discrimination that leads to fostering hatred among fellow Indians.
When you look at India’s heterogeneous perspective, there are many areas that can potentially divide us. Take arranged marriages as the indicator of what is acceptable. First comes religion, then caste, language, and then state of origin. It’s very clear that no family will arrange a marriage between two people who speak different languages. The exception I’ve noticed is among Rajputs, where the ruler stratum is the most important factor.
Whether the bride or groom comes from Rajasthan, Nepal, Bengal, Gujarat, Karnataka or Manipur does not matter so long as the social lineage is from the ruling family (although in independent India, nobody has any ruling powers anymore). Other areas critical in arranged marriages are matching the family status in terms of economic power and what the boy — and nowadays the girl as well — earns. Matching the education level matters as that anticipates the earning capacity and long-term compatibility of the couple. A most denigrating factor is checking the colour of skin, which purportedly determines beauty. All marriage advertisements look for a fair person, while a dark-skinned person describes himself/herself as wheatish complexioned.
Interstate, cross-communal marriages between persons speaking different languages or having different religious beliefs can happen only within the bounds of a love marriage. So aside from race, religion, caste or language, we subscribe to divisions of rich and poor, literacy-illiteracy, lower to higher education, jobs, being a native from a north, west, south, eastern state, social standing from being a member of a family who is in politics, industry, business, trade, armed forces, education, working in a corporate, having a government job, or being professionals like doctors, lawyers or tailors and carpenters. So many ingredients are available in our country to express our racism.
The race problem is not limited to India alone. In spite of being part of the European Union, different countries in Europe rarely identify one another as Europeans. All may have the same skin colour, but each nation has its own language. Hence, there is no unity. Significantly, a historical residue can create such strong hatred that at one point a whole race was about to be obliterated. During the 12th century — when the Pope declared that Catholics were prohibited from lending money — people turned to the Jews for their economic requirements.
The cumulative result was institutionalised hatred against the Jews. Nazi Hitler’s “Final Solution” strategy to exterminate Jews expressed blatant racism propagated by the state. Racism can be expressed even in difficult economic situations. After World War II, the French were very negative in their dealings with the Italians and Spaniards. After six decades, the situation has almost been repaired, though if somebody is doing something the wrong way, you can still hear comments like, “Why are you working stupidly like a Portugese?”
A controversial survey from three decades ago which spanned 80 countries, which was mapped by The Washington Post, put India at No. 2 position after Jordan among the world’s most racist countries. The accuracy of this survey has been questioned. As addressing African origin people as Black or Negro is taboo in the US (you have to call them African-Americans), would any American openly express bias?
TV debaters vehemently argue for and against Indians being racists. It’s a pity that our education system is so archaic that children are still not taught to appreciate the diversity of our different states, languages, religions, food habits and cultures in a positive way. Unless that happens, the extreme discrimination that killed Nido will always exist.
New Delhi: After the murder of Arunachal boy Nido Tania, the home ministry had set up a committee to address the issue of racial discrimination in cities. It, however,has failed to meet its March 31 deadline.
Students from the Northeast and activists are disappointed as the committee has also stopped holding both internal and public meetings. They allege that its members-—retired bureaucrats from all eight northeastern states-—were never motivated about drafting a strong report against racism.
The committee, headed by M P Bezbaruah, former IAS officer and member of North Eastern Council (NEC), had held a few meetings with people from the northeast in Delhi, Pune, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Mumbai but no such meeting has taken place since March.
S Saha, member secretary of the committee and deputy secretary at the ministry, is not sure why the panel has stopped working. However, a student leader and member of the committee, J Mavio, claimed: “The home ministry has asked the committee to suspend work because of elections.”
Civil society groups are not very hopeful. “We have been consistently helping the committee by facilitating meetings and submitting cases of harassment. But the home ministry and the chairperson of the committee have been systematically avoiding us, indicating the lackadaisical attitude of the members,” said a statement issued by North East India Forum against Racism (NEIFAR), a
coalition of student organizations and activists with over 100 members.
The protesters against racial discrimination had hoped that the committee would be as effective as the Justice Verma Committee formed after the Nirbhaya gang rape.
They had also written to the ministry for the inclusion of a retired Supreme Courtjudge and an academician.
“The committee was formed after vehement protests at Jantar Mantar and other places. I don’t understand how is this committee’s report related to politics or elections. They were delaying the matter even long before the election dates were announced,” said David Boyes, convener of NEIFAR. Another member, Phurpa Tshering, said, “The committee members have not been communicating with us either.”
Nido died after allegedly being assaulted by a shopkeeper and his friends in Lajpat Nagar on Jaunary 29, 2014. The committee is examining the causes behind the attacks on people from the Northeast and the racial discrimination they face in the cities. It is also supposed to suggest legal remedies to deal with racial discrimination.
VICTIMS OF RACIAL ATTACKS
Jan 29 | Nido Tania (19) battered allegedly by a group of men in Lajpat Nagar. Owners of a sweet shop passed racial comments about his hair. Angered, Nido smashed the glass counter and was assaulted brutally
Feb 7 | A 14-year-old girl raped and assaulted allegedly by her landlord’s son in Munirka village Feb 9 | Two Manipuri boys roughed up near Madangir market after a quarrel
Mar 25 | A couple in Munirka beaten up by landlord’s son and goons for trying to step out at night
Mar 29 | Six youths from the northeast beaten with rods at Sikanderpur in Gurgaon. Two develop hearing impairment
NO HEADWAY
Govt’s NE panel fails to file report on time
Students And Activists From Region Upset
Jayashree Nandi TNN
New Delhi: After the murder of Arunachal boy Nido Tania, the home ministry had set up a committee to address the issue of racial discrimination in cities. It, however,has failed to meet its March 31 deadline.
Students from the Northeast and activists are disappointed as the committee has also stopped holding both internal and public meetings. They allege that its members-—retired bureaucrats from all eight northeastern states-—were never motivated about drafting a strong report against racism.
The committee, headed by M P Bezbaruah, former IAS officer and member of North Eastern Council (NEC), had held a few meetings with people from the northeast in Delhi, Pune, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Mumbai but no such meeting has taken place since March.
S Saha, member secretary of the committee and deputy secretary at the ministry, is not sure why the panel has stopped working. However, a student leader and member of the committee, J Mavio, claimed: “The home ministry has asked the committee to suspend work because of elections.”
Civil society groups are not very hopeful. “We have been consistently helping the committee by facilitating meetings and submitting cases of harassment. But the home ministry and the chairperson of the committee have been systematically avoiding us, indicating the lackadaisical attitude of the members,” said a statement issued by North East India Forum against Racism (NEIFAR), a
coalition of student organizations and activists with over 100 members.
The protesters against racial discrimination had hoped that the committee would be as effective as the Justice Verma Committee formed after the Nirbhaya gang rape.
They had also written to the ministry for the inclusion of a retired Supreme Courtjudge and an academician.
“The committee was formed after vehement protests at Jantar Mantar and other places. I don’t understand how is this committee’s report related to politics or elections. They were delaying the matter even long before the election dates were announced,” said David Boyes, convener of NEIFAR. Another member, Phurpa Tshering, said, “The committee members have not been communicating with us either.”
Nido died after allegedly being assaulted by a shopkeeper and his friends in Lajpat Nagar on Jaunary 29, 2014. The committee is examining the causes behind the attacks on people from the Northeast and the racial discrimination they face in the cities. It is also supposed to suggest legal remedies to deal with racial discrimination.
VICTIMS OF RACIAL ATTACKS
Jan 29 | Nido Tania (19) battered allegedly by a group of men in Lajpat Nagar. Owners of a sweet shop passed racial comments about his hair. Angered, Nido smashed the glass counter and was assaulted brutally
Feb 7 | A 14-year-old girl raped and assaulted allegedly by her landlord’s son in Munirka village Feb 9 | Two Manipuri boys roughed up near Madangir market after a quarrel
Mar 25 | A couple in Munirka beaten up by landlord’s son and goons for trying to step out at night
Mar 29 | Six youths from the northeast beaten with rods at Sikanderpur in Gurgaon. Two develop hearing impairment
Alienated at home
The problems that people from the Northeast face in Delhi can be mitigated if more cops from the region join the police force
The M.P. Bezbaruah Committee that had been set up to look into the problems faced by people from the Northeast submitted its report to the Home Ministry last week. Though the report has not yet been made public, it is learnt that one of the key recommendations is to increase the number of personnel from the region in various departments, especially the police, across the country.
Speaking to The Hindu, Delhi Police Nodal Officer for the Northeastern community, Joint Commissioner Robin Hibu said more personnel from the Northeast would have a salutary effect on the force. “Currently there are 41 personnel in the Delhi Police, which has strength of more than 84,000. People from the region will understand the problems of the complainants and eliminate the language barrier. Also, personnel from the Northeast in police uniform would be seen as a confidence building measure,” he said.
Delhi Police recruitment is open to all citizens of India, irrespective of their domicile. Applicants, however, need to know Hindi.
Last year, the recruitment test for personnel below Assistant Sub- Inspector rank was held in Guwahati, but a police source revealed that publicity for the test was poor.
Mr. Hibu was appointed after Nido Tania, a student from Arunachal Pradesh, was assaulted in Lajpat Nagar and later succumbed to his injuries in January this year. He established a nodal cell and the 1093 helpline along with other officers from the region.
Also, committees for each State have been set up. They had their task cut out: that of ensuring that the police register complaints filed by people from Northeast and also sensitising the force.
“The presence of officers from the Northeast will ensure that there is no communication gap. Also, many officers do not understand the food and cultural habits of the Northeast. Inclusion of officers from the region will increase interaction and awareness. We will be able to address concerns more effectively,” Mr. Hibu said.
Activists this paper spoke to said though there has been a visible change in the attitude of the police, the nodal cell needs more teeth to ensure compliance with directives on inclusion and fair treatment.
J. Maivio, president of the Naga Students Union Delhi, explained: “The 1093 number should connect directly to the Northeast Cell and not the Police Control Room. The cell should be given the powers of a police station (like SC/ST police stations in Madhya Pradesh) to register cases and investigate. Other recommendations we made to through the Bezbaruah Committee include introduction of courses on Northeast history and culture in all colleges, so people understand us better.” J.T. Tagam, member of the Delhi Police Committee for citizens from Arunachal Pradesh, told this paper: “The language the police use is harsh which makes our people unwilling to go to them for help. Northeastern officers are posted in the armed police and training departments, while they are actually needed in police stations like Vasant Vihar which have high concentrations of people from the region.”
Delhi has seen an influx of people from the Northeast since the mid 1980s.
This was accompanied by complaints of discrimination against them by locals and officials.
In 1989, several women constables from the Northeast and Kerala joined the force as part of an initiative by the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. These officers form the core of the force’s outreach today.
In 1992, Raingam Tamchon, a Tangkhul Naga, was posted as Assistant Commissioner of Police in North Delhi. He resolved several issues faced by students from the region in Delhi University.
“There was a change in the attitude of officers at the Maurice Nagar police station and students, hitherto apprehensive of going to the police, gained confidence. This initiative should have been replicated then itself,” said David Boyes, Convener of the Northeast India Forum Against Racism (NEIFAR). Tamchon passed away in 2006 and a football tournament is held in Delhi in his memory every year. Mr. Hibu’s reputation for being accessible at any time earned him the post of nodal officer.
“But Hibu can't be in every police station,” said Sunny Tayeng, general secretary of the Arunachal Students’ Union Delhi.
“In the Munirka rape case, the police at Vasant Vihar could not understand what the victim and her father were saying. They can’t understand our Hindi accent, neither can they speak English. The presence of Northeastern officers will end stereotyping of us by cops and will improve access to justice,” she added.
No comments:
Post a Comment