02-18-2007, 07:51 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Clear-eyed on SIMI </b>
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Supreme Court speaks for India
In bluntly telling the counsel for the Students International Movement of India (SIMI) that she represented a "secessionist movement" that did not deserve to have the ban on it, imposed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, to be removed, the Supreme Court has spoken for the citizen. The two-judge bench that turned down the SIMI petition refused to accept that SIMI had not resorted to any "anti-national activity" since 2003 and insistently noted, "You have not stopped your activities." The apex court reflected the growing disquiet - perceptible to all, save the Union Home Minister and his colleagues in the UPA - that the domestic sources and facilitators of Islamist terrorism are a looming problem. In a series of terrorist attacks in Uttar Pradesh - particularly the strike on the Ram temple in Ayodhya in 2005 - in the pre-Diwali bomb attacks in Delhi in the winter of 2005, and elsewhere, the logistical support provided by SIMI modules to the terrorists was apparent. It has emerged as the footsoldier organisation of the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and the face of the radicalisation of a section of the Muslim underclass, particularly in Uttar Pradesh but also in cities as far apart as Bhopal and Hyderabad. Despite having to go along with the ban in 2006 - after having opposed the NDA imposed prohibitions on SIMI in 2001 and 2003 - the Congress and its allies have been wary of admitting to the extent of the problem. To recognise that violent Islamism has a strong, homegrown element - of which SIMI is the menacing face - is to, it believes, alienate Muslim voters. In Uttar Pradesh, Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav's Government has followed just such a short-sighted policy. Pandering to a criminalised section of the community, it has refused to curtail SIMI's operational space and, indeed, has allowed it a certain political legitimacy. The result is there for all to see. From Gorakhpur in the east to Aligarh in the west, sectarian violence has been a feature of Uttar Pradesh's polity over the past year; and SIMI's fingerprints have been detected almost everywhere.
<b>
The painting of SIMI as some sort of a "victim" of a vicious BJP-led Government was only one arm of the UPA's multi-pronged approach to present its predecessor as an oppressor of minorities. The removal of the Prevention of Terrorist Activities (POTA) Act was of a piece with this.</b> Today, after terrorist outrage in Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore, after the admission by the Government that terrorist organisations are manipulating the financial markets and occupying islands off the coast of India, it is worth asking what the UPA is doing to actually tackle this principal internal security challenge. In reminding India that SIMI is a clear and present danger, the Supreme Court has done well. One day, India needs its highest court to tell the Government of the imperative need for a national anti-terrorism law
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The Pioneer Edit Desk
Supreme Court speaks for India
In bluntly telling the counsel for the Students International Movement of India (SIMI) that she represented a "secessionist movement" that did not deserve to have the ban on it, imposed under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, to be removed, the Supreme Court has spoken for the citizen. The two-judge bench that turned down the SIMI petition refused to accept that SIMI had not resorted to any "anti-national activity" since 2003 and insistently noted, "You have not stopped your activities." The apex court reflected the growing disquiet - perceptible to all, save the Union Home Minister and his colleagues in the UPA - that the domestic sources and facilitators of Islamist terrorism are a looming problem. In a series of terrorist attacks in Uttar Pradesh - particularly the strike on the Ram temple in Ayodhya in 2005 - in the pre-Diwali bomb attacks in Delhi in the winter of 2005, and elsewhere, the logistical support provided by SIMI modules to the terrorists was apparent. It has emerged as the footsoldier organisation of the Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and the face of the radicalisation of a section of the Muslim underclass, particularly in Uttar Pradesh but also in cities as far apart as Bhopal and Hyderabad. Despite having to go along with the ban in 2006 - after having opposed the NDA imposed prohibitions on SIMI in 2001 and 2003 - the Congress and its allies have been wary of admitting to the extent of the problem. To recognise that violent Islamism has a strong, homegrown element - of which SIMI is the menacing face - is to, it believes, alienate Muslim voters. In Uttar Pradesh, Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav's Government has followed just such a short-sighted policy. Pandering to a criminalised section of the community, it has refused to curtail SIMI's operational space and, indeed, has allowed it a certain political legitimacy. The result is there for all to see. From Gorakhpur in the east to Aligarh in the west, sectarian violence has been a feature of Uttar Pradesh's polity over the past year; and SIMI's fingerprints have been detected almost everywhere.
<b>
The painting of SIMI as some sort of a "victim" of a vicious BJP-led Government was only one arm of the UPA's multi-pronged approach to present its predecessor as an oppressor of minorities. The removal of the Prevention of Terrorist Activities (POTA) Act was of a piece with this.</b> Today, after terrorist outrage in Mumbai, Delhi and Bangalore, after the admission by the Government that terrorist organisations are manipulating the financial markets and occupying islands off the coast of India, it is worth asking what the UPA is doing to actually tackle this principal internal security challenge. In reminding India that SIMI is a clear and present danger, the Supreme Court has done well. One day, India needs its highest court to tell the Government of the imperative need for a national anti-terrorism law
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->