Nidae Kashmir

A best news channel which publishes latest videos from Jammu and Kashmir which includes Politics, Public Grievances, Current affairs, Off-beat stories, Religion, etc. and We want to combine literature and journalism on one platform.

Breaking News·Kashmir·Recent News·Top Stories

Ansar Ghazwat-ul-Hind wiped out in Kashmir: DGP

April 9, 2021

Nidae Kashmir

7 militants were killed in two different operations in South Kashmir At least seven militants, including chief of the Ansar Gazwat Ul Hind (AGuH)

On December 15, 2019, when details of the Delhi police’s brutal attack on the students of Jamia Millia Islamia started coming in, the first thing I was reminded of was an incident of police brutality on Jamia students from April 2000. On the night of April 9 that year, the Delhi Police had brutally assaulted, arrested and abused more than a hundred students, including minors. There were several reasons why the April 2000 attack came to my mind when I got to know the details of the December 2019 attack on the students. The first was the similarities between the two. Secondly, that was the year I had arrived in Jamia for the first time from my hometown in Bihar to appear in the entrance test for Class XI. Though I had arrived nearly three months after the incident, it was still afresh in the memories of the students and they were yet to recover from the mental and physical trauma. I remember seeing posters and wall writings demanding justice in different parts of the campus. Students raising their hands leave Jamia Milia University following the police’s attack on the campus on December 15, 2019. Photo: Reuters From seniors who were victims of the attack, I heard horrific stories of the attack. I was told students were thrown out of the balcony of the third floor of the Shafiqur Rehman Kidwai (SRK) hostel, where some students from my home district (Supaul) were staying. According a fact-finding report by the People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR), it was perhaps one of the worst ever incidents of police terror against students since the Emergency. As per another fact-finding report, the police had came to the university library on April 9, 2000, to pick up two students. In protest, the students blocked the road. The police called reinforcements and resorted to lathi-charge on the students. Meanwhile, the provost intervened and persuaded the students to go back to their hostels. However, “once the students reached the hostel, all of a sudden the police attacked them and unleashed the trail of terror with full vengeance.” Even the school students – studying for their exams in the Central Library were not spared. The fact finding teams which visited the university noted in their reports that the attack was so brutal that even after policemen were deployed to clear up any signs of the attack on the morning of April 10 and bloodstains were washed off, when they visited the campus, the SRK hostel (where much of the attack was focussed) was “in shambles with glaring evidence of destruction.” Bloodstains were visible to a fact-finding team in rooms, corridors and staircases, five days after the attack. At the time of the attack, several students were in the mosque of one of the hostels. “I was called a criminal and an ISI agent by the policemen,” a student recalled. “The police officers started beating me brutally and pulled me out of the mosque. In the process, I was also assaulted with rifle butts, due to which my leg was broken and I was writhing in pain. Then I was stuffed into the police Gypsy car and taken to AIIMS. On the way, I was continuously beaten and my beard was pulled,” he wrote in his complaint to the National Human Rights Commission. The PUDR report states that many of the injured students spent the night in the hospital and were brought back to the police station the next morning. It is only then they discovered that they had been victims of a cruel trick as “all those who had got medical attention, and for whom Medico-Legal cases had to be registered, were charged with a number of offences including section 307 of IPC (attempt to murder).” Thereafter, 66 of them were produced in the Patiala house court. When they were presented before the magistrate in the evening, he reportedly enquired the students, “Kisi ko kuch kehna hai (Anyone wants to say something)?” To which some of them said, “Sir, imtehan (exams) hain…” But instead of releasing the students, the judge sent them to the Tihar jail. An acquaintance of mine, one of the students who was beaten and sent to jail, recently told me, “It was the worst night of my life.” He was then a student of BA final and his exams were going on. “I nearly missed my exam since I was sent to Tihar. I don’t want to discuss those horrifying days of my life but it would be a lie if I claim that I have moved on and don’t remember anything. I still remember everything and they will be part of my memory as long as I am alive,” said he, requesting anonymity as he feared backlash even 21 years later. Fortunately, the cases against the students were withdrawn. However, this also meant that the police officers who unleashed violence on the students were also let off. Though a magisterial enquiry was ordered by the then Lt Governor Vijai Kapoor, its result was the same as one often sees and hears about in these enquiries. The enquiry was headed by the then deputy commissioner of police (South). According to him, several innocent students were caught up in the conflict and wrongly beaten up by the police and the local ‘land mafia’ was responsible for fanning the violence. Also Read: A Year on, NHRC’s Probes on Police Violence in AMU and Jamia Remain Testaments to Impunity By now, the striking similarities in the pattern of both attacks are evident. In both cases, students were brutally attacked without any provocation and communally abused, with an intention to debase and humiliate the Muslim community and an institution belonging to them. Moreover, in both cases, the police acted like a criminal marauding force, in brazen violation of all the established norms and procedures. It cannot be a mere coincidence that both in April 2000 and December 2019, the Central government was run by the NDA, which is led by the BJP. In 2000, the Union home ministry which commands the Delhi police was under L.K. Advani and in 2019, it was headed by Amit Shah. The attacks were carried out with a gap of nearly two decades, but when one takes a closer look at them, it seems the Delhi police used the same ‘toolkit’ both times and got away with impunity. In a sense, what happened in December 2019 was a repetition of April 2000. Such an assault on a university could happen again because the culprits of the April 2000 attack were not punished. Today, a majority of people might have forgotten about or do not know about the April 2000 attack. But the fact remains that those who faced the police’s violence still have a fresh memory of the brutality unleashed on them, as my acquaintance recently remarked.

Breaking News·National·Recent News

Over Two Decades Ago, The Forgotten Attack On Jamia Students

April 9, 2021

Nidae Kashmir

On December 15, 2019, when details of the Delhi police’s brutal attack on the students of Jamia Millia Islamia started coming in, the first thing I

Breaking News·National·Recent News

Resurgence of COVID-19 in India: A Tale of Six Unlearnt Lessons

April 9, 2021

Nidae Kashmir

With more than one lakh new coronavirus infections a day, India occupied the number one spot in the world earlier this week. The number is higher

Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir police’s decision to pursue legal action against scribes and photographers who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of clashes between forces and protesters has created a flutter in the press fraternity in Kashmir, with media bodies terming the latest decree as a “tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground”. Media freedom has been frequently subject to restrictions in Kashmir and journalists often find themselves summoned to police stations, booked under FIRs and manhandled by the forces. On Tuesday, Vijay Kumar, Kashmir’s inspector general of police, warned journalists against covering operations at gun-fire sites in the real-time and printing content that “promotes anti-national sentiment”. “The media persons should do not carry any live coverage of any encounter or law and order situation,” a local wire service quoted him saying. “The freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restrictions that should not violate other person’s right to life guaranteed under Article 21 or putting the national security in jeopardy.” On Wednesday evening, Kumar said he has issued written directions to all district Senior Superintendents of Police (SSPs) to take legal action “based on facts” against media professionals who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of “law and order” situations. “I have already issued written directions to all districts SSPs yesterday. District SSPs will take legal action on facts,” Kumar told a wire agency on Wednesday, adding that directions applied to both national as well as for local media outlets. Kumar did not entertain calls from The Wire to confirm the reports. However, another SSP-level officer said that there was no order on this front and IG police “has just quoted Hon’ble Supreme court order and Cable TV Act”. He did not specify which apex court order was cited. Also read: Despite Reporting With ‘Utmost Honesty’, Threat of Arrest Looms Over Kashmiri Journalist The latest announcements have triggered a wave of apprehensions among Kashmiri photojournalists, who said they were unsure how security forces are going to react the next time they approach an encounter site. “Already, police stops us at the peripheral cordon when the encounter is going on,” said Waseem Nabi, a Kashmiri photojournalist. “Only after the gunbattles end do we swarm to the site of operation. In this light, it is really confusing what the directions want to convey.” The announcements also follow a cordon and search operation at Gulab Bagh area at the outskirts of Srinagar city on Wednesday. The 17-hour-long search operation during which forces claimed they fired warning shots to elicit a retaliatory fire from militants, ended without any exchange with reports claiming that militants may have escaped. When journalists reached the site the next day, they discovered a white-coloured building riddled with what appeared to be marks from heavy ammunition rounds. The interior of the building was also damaged significantly. Journalists in Kashmir have often found themselves at the receiving end of police action when anti-militant operations are underway. There are instances of journalists suffering violence at the hands of security forces during stone-pelting clashes and protests. Last week, a police constable was filmed kicking Qisar Mir, a Kashmiri photojournalist, near a gunfight site in Pulwama in South Kashmir. Similarly, Saqib Majeed and Shafat Farooq, two photojournalists covering clashes outside Jamia Masjid in Srinagar, claimed they were manhandled by policemen last month. Farooq, who said cops hit him with the rear end of a rifle, was later hospitalised. Kashmiri journalists are befuddled by the choice of words used by the police. “They say we are covering live encounters when actually we have never done that,” said Syed Shahriyar, a multimedia journalist who has been published by VICE news, BBC, Independent and Al Jazeera. “We only rush to gunfight site when forces withdraw. By placing restrictions on that, maybe the police is trying to convey that we mustn’t cover these events at all.” Coverage of gunfight sites has been an emotive issue for security agencies in Kashmir. The reports of destruction of residential or commercial structures where militants take shelter have become a source of simmering anger among the civilian population. During the last week’s encounter at Kakapora in Pulwama, video clips showing forces blowing up a house using improvised explosive devices went viral on the internet and elicited a resentful response from Kashmiri social media users. Also read: Srinagar: Journalists Allege Manhandling by Police Amidst Clashes at Jamia Masjid Last month too, six houses were razed to rubble during a gunfight at Rawalpora village in Shopian. Through media interviews with the locals, it came to light that villagers were allegedly told by the army to spray their houses with combustible liquid and set fire to them. The army later issued a statement refuting such charges. Last year, during a similar fire-exchange in Nawa Kadal area of Srinagar city, dozens of houses were destroyed. The editor of the news website that reported the extent of the destruction was later summoned by the police over his publication’s coverage. In Kashmir, media bodies have said they feel anguished at the police’s decision to place further restrictions on covering gunfight scenes. “If this is a part of the official policy of police then it appears to be a tactic to coerce journalists into not reporting facts on the ground,” a statement from 11 Kashmir-based media conglomerations said. “It also seems to be a part of the string of measures taken by the authorities to suppress freedom of press in the region.” The statement said that the media in Kashmir are aware of the journalistic guidelines and ethics they must demonstrate during gunfights and law and order situations, and that they have always upheld these principles. “Covering and reporting law and order situations in the region is one of the basic requirements for most news organisations and hence an essential part of the professional role of media professionals. Barring them from covering such events would mean stopping them from delivering their professional duties,” it said. “Press freedom is the cornerstone of a democracy and any attack on it undermines the democratic setup of which media is the fourth pillar. Any such attack on press freedom and journalism is highly distressful.”

Breaking News·Kashmir·Recent News·Top Stories

Kashmir Journalists Confused, Worried by Police Warning Against Covering Gunbattles

April 9, 2021

Nidae Kashmir

Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir police’s decision to pursue legal action against scribes and photographers who come close to gunbattle sites or near scenes of

New Delhi: Most days are not good days for Indian filmmakers. But the abolition of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) – a statutory body addressing filmmakers aggrieved by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) decisions – has made bad days worse. Indian film certification comprises three bodies: the Examining Committee, the Revising Committee, and the FCAT. If a director is dissatisfied with the Examining Committee, then she approaches the Revising Committee. If she disagrees with the Revising Committee, then her final recourse is the FCAT – followed by the courts. But the FCAT abolition has removed a crucial link in the process, compelling the filmmakers to approach the judiciary, an expensive and time-consuming procedure. Sure, the FCAT wasn’t perfect. Ask Meera Chaudhary, the co-director of the documentary En Dino Muzaffarnagar. In August 2014, the FCAT upheld the CBFC’s order, refusing to certify the film, saying the documentary had “grave potential of creating communal disharmony”. En Dino Muzaffarnagar never released. But in several cases, the FCAT did champion freedom of expression. It cleared several recent films, including Great Grand Masti; Shaheb, Bibi, Golaam; Haraamkhor; Lipstick Under My Burkha; and Babumoshai Bandookbaaz, with an “A” certificate, overturning the CBFC’s unreasonable objections and inordinate cuts. The FCAT, in fact, also saved one of the most controversial Indian films, Bandit Queen. The Tribunal head, in that remarkable decision, suggested that the censor board representative “take a trip to Khajuraho” to “understand the difference between nakedness, nudity, and obscenity”. So, the filmmakers quite rightly considered the FCAT a reliable bulwark against the CBFC’s (often) draconian orders. The FCAT even rescued the former CBFC chief, Pahlaj Nihalani, from the clutches of the censor board, reducing the number of cuts in his 2018 film, Rangeela Raja, from 20 to three. Former CBFC chief Pahlaj Nihalani. Photo: Facebook/Pahlaj Nihalani The FCAT has been historically more progressive than the CBFC. But the filmmakers also liked it for a different reason: It dispended quick judgments, allowing the producers to release their films on time, saving them from financial loss. It was also a sweet spot between the censor board and the courts, as the FCAT members at times also included people from the film fraternity, who knew how to judge a movie in the right context. The FCAT abolition will also overburden the courts, exacerbating their post-COVID-19 lockdown backlog. In 2018 and 2019, for instance, 53 filmmakers approached the FCAT: that is, in the present scenario, a case every two weeks. This decision then doesn’t seem friendly for either the filmmakers or the courts. Whom does it benefit then? The Central government, of course. Every ruling party, irrespective of its ideology, has tried controlling the filmmaking narrative in this country. But the level of censorship over the last seven years has been quite unprecedented. Less than six weeks ago, the government issued guidelines for the OTT platforms, wanting to exercise greater control over channels that don’t come under the purview of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting whose legality was questioned by a parliamentary panel. This also seems like a disjointed decision, because it contradicts the recommendations of the 2013 Justice Mudgal report and the 2016 Shyam Benegal report. If the Mudgal committee wanted to expand the ambit of the FCAT, then the Benegal team wanted the Tribunal to be “empowered to cover all grievances under the lines of Broadcasting Content Complaints Council”. The filmmakers are understandably disappointed, as this decision humiliates them further. Vishal Bhardwaj called it a “sad day for cinema”. Hansal Mehta considered the abolition “arbitrary” and “restrictive”. Anurag Kashyap, familiar with censorship troubles, said that the producers would “become scared to get caught in the loop of the high court” and that it’d “discourage filmmakers to make movies on stronger themes”. The Narendra Modi government has never enjoyed a healthy relationship with the film fraternity. Before it targeted the JNU students, it tried to control the Film and Television Institute of India by appointing Gajendra Chauhan, a forgotten side actor and a BJP member, as its chairman. That sparked a huge protest, culminating in dozens of filmmakers and writers returning their National Awards. But the government and the prime minister continued to court a select few from the industry, clicking selfies with them, showering them with prestigious awards. It is quite clear that, when it comes to filmmaking expression in this country, the ruling party is the real director, reducing filmmakers to props, making them dance to arbitrary tunes.

Breaking News·Recent News·Top Stories

With Abolition of Film Certificate Tribunal, Bad Days for Filmmakers Will Become Worse

April 9, 2021

Nidae Kashmir

New Delhi: Most days are not good days for Indian filmmakers. But the abolition of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) – a statutory body