SHRI RAM JETHMALANI (CONTD.): Sir, how did these two signatories come to the conclusion that this was a case of rape? (Interruptions) I am bound to yield if you want to explain. (Interruptions) Please tell us how did you become a rape expert? (Interruptions)

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: Sir, I am very ignorant about the expertise on rape. I can grant all that expertise to Ram. I am very ignorant about it. (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI BRINDA KARAT: Sir, I object to these frivolous comments about rape victims. (Interruptions)

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: I am not being frivolous. (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Are you yielding?


SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: Sir, the discrepancy that he is pointing out in what I have written, I am one of the co-authors of this, is, I presume that on the day of 9th and 10th, the point is that murder took place on 9th and the body was found on 10th. That is what is being written here. That is a point of clarification. There is no lack of credibility on this point. (Interruptions)

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: Sir, I have no doubt that the dead body was found on the 10th. But, how did you come to the conclusion that she was raped on the 9th? (Interruptions) Now, I will tell you what the motivation is...(Interruptions)....

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN) : Please address the Chair. (Interruptions)


THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, no. (Interruptions) Please. (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI BRINDA KARAT: Sir, this is highly objectionable. What is he talking about, making a joke of all this? (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, no. Please sit down. (Interruptions) I will deal with it. Please sit down. (Interruptions) Mr. Ram Jethmalani, please, don't make such a wrong statement. (Interruptions) That particular statement will not go on record. (Interruptions) I will deal with it. You please sit down. That sentence will not go on record. Don't make such a blanket statement about it.

SHRIMATI BRINDA KARAT: Thank you, Sir. (Interruptions)

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: Sir, I am complaining that there is evidence that there is some fabrication in this document.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: That is your view. You can explain that.

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: Sir, now, see the incident of 14th of March which has been described in this document. The 14th March incident has been the subject matter of a judgment of the Kolkata High Court which judgment expressly records that the entire incident that took place on the 14th of March, is totally illegal and unconstitutional. Therefore, the theory which is accepted in this document is totally contrary to a judicial finding which till today is a good finding, not disturbed. (Interruptions)

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: How, Sir? (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Okay. Please proceed. (Interruptions)

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: Sir, it is challenged. (Interruptions)


* Not recorded.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): There is time constraint. (Interruptions)

SHRI DIGVIJAY SINGH: Sir, what time constraint? You speak. You can take my time. (Interruptions)

SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI: Sir, it can go on for whole day. (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: I have allowed him. (Interruptions) Why does he take away your time? (Interruptions) Let him talk. Try to conclude yourself.

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: Sir, it is not a very pleasant thing. I am anxious to conclude. Sir, this document itself says that the CPM has proposed that the Government should appeal to the Supreme Court. But, till today, this judgment of the High Court stands. The finding is that on the 14th, a grave breach of the Constitution and law took place and the attack by the police was totally unprovoked and the murders were totally unjustified. Now, if that is so, if this was the situation on the 14th of March, you come back to November and December, nothing has changed. Nothing has changed after that. Nobody is able to show how these people deserted their homes. Now, Sir, there are two or three questions which are of great importance. It is said that this is really a fight between this new organisation. What you call it? BUPC.

(Continued by RSS/3c)


SHRI RAM JETHMALANI (CONTD.): Now, Sir, the findings are that this organization, the Bhumi Ucched Pratirodh Committee, consists mainly of the CPI(M) members.

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: No, no. Who says?...(Interruptions).... What is this?

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN( PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Mr. Jethmalani, you don't respond to them. You please continue. Otherwise, your time will be curtailed. Don't react to them.

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: Sir, the evidence has been furnished by responsible people who held a meeting only yesterday at the university and this finding has come, and if not majority of the members, some members of the CPI(M) are members of this organisation....(Interruptions)...

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: No, no.... (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: That is correct.

SHRI SITARAM YECHURY: Sir, as a CPI (M) leader, I am saying, no.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Please conclude.

SHRI RAM JETHMALANI: The second thing is that even the advice of the Central Government is to ensure that people return to Nandigram, to the homes from which they have been expelled. Now, a large number of people who have left are persons who are now rotting in camps still. How did they go out? Even the Minister said this morning that Nandigram is an area in which there is no presence of any Opposition party; BJP practically nil, Trinmool, very insignificant and Congress almost nil. Now, who ensured that these persons must flee in thousands from Nandigram and seek shelter elsewhere? Now, this is important, and their defence is Maoist. The Central Government is for all purposes, your Government, the Government which depends for its survival on your party. So, Sir, I think, this is a very important thing that today, I believe, we have to move forward from this situation, and I think, it is the duty of the State Government under the present circumstances to come out with the truth, apologise to the nation, and carry on the State Government in accordance with the Constitution. We have no hostility against the Government. We want the Government to survive. But we want the people of this country to live in security. After all, they are your own people; most of them were your own people till today, and it is those people that have run away from the State. Thank you. (Ends)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Now, Shri D. Raja...(Interruptions)...

SHRI D. RAJA (TAMIL NADU): Sir, thank you for this opportunity. We have heard several speeches made in this august House. I do understand the strong emotions, the strong feelings with regard to human sufferings, tragedies that took place in Nandigram. Having said this, I must tell this august House that we are a democracy; democracy is a form of governance, democracy is a way of living, and we should know how to deal with the popular resistance, popular dissent. Nandigram should be a lesson to all the parties, Left or Right or Centre. Nandigram should be a lesson to all the Governments, not only to the West Bengal Government, but to all the Governments and also to the Union Government. (contd. by 3d)


SHRI D. RAJA (CONTD.): But we should also see the politics behind the entire development since we are discussing the proposal to set up SEZ and the large-scale violence in Nandigram. In mathematics, there are two methods; one, a problem is given; you will have to arrive at the solution, and the other, a solution will be given; you will have to analyse it and find out what is the problem. Now, that is what I understood when I heard the BJP leader Smt. Sushma Swaraj's speech. She said, "Now, it is time the Centre should invoke article 356 and place the State under President's rule." If that is the solution, what is the problem? And who created this problem? Sir, we will have to try to understand and analyse the entire situation because as regards the SEZ Act, when it was passed by the Parliament, we were also party to it, but when the law was passed, it was very harmless. After that, the rules were framed. When the rules were framed, we understood the adverse impact of the SEZ Act and the rules. The Left parties, in fact, asked the Union Government, the UPA Government, to go for drastic amendments of the SEZ Act and the rules. It is because of the macro economic policies pursued by the UPA Government that there is a race among the State Governments on the SEZ issue. And this is one thing which one has to try to understand because there is a wrong notion that SEZ is imperative for industrial development of the country or SEZ is equated with the industrial development of the country. Since 1956 when the country adopted the Industrial Policy Resolution, we did build the industries, light industries, medium industries and heavy industries, and we have a strong public sector industry and a private sector industry. This all happened without SEZ also. If you argue that SEZ is imperative, inevitable for industrial development or industrial assertion, we have a strong reservation, and we do not agree with such an understanding. But when SEZs are created, we did demand that fertile land, agricultural land, should not be taken for establishing SEZs. In fact, the Congress Party also made a Resolution to this effect. But what is happening, in practice, is a different thing. So, for Nandigram, there was a proposal. There, I agree with the hon. Minister, Mr. Priyaranjan Dasmunsi that there was a notification by the Haldia Development Authority on the question of acquisition of land for some kind of a chemical lab. Our Party was critical of that. And in fact, Nandigram is represented by our Party MLA. And our Party took a stand that there should not be any chemical lab; no land should be acquired. And this is known to everybody. Despite this, how our MLA was roughed up; how he was manhandled; how he was driven away from his house; how he was not allowed to enter into his own place; who was responsible...(Interruptions)...

SHRI K.B. SHANAPPA: But who was responsible for that? ...(Interruptions)...

SHRI D. RAJA: That is what I am asking you; who was responsible? ...(Interruptions)... I am asking you because you know everything. ...(Interruptions)... Because you are asking, I am asking. Sushmaji was narrating all the stories. And she should say who was responsible if she has some information. Otherwise, the Home Minister is sitting here; let him respond to it. ...(Interruptions)... The Home Minister will be responding. You are not the Home Minister. He is there. So, let him respond.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Mr. Raja, please address the Chair. ...(Interruptions)... Please address the Chair. Don't react.

SHRI D. RAJA: Sir, the point here is, we should try to understand what went wrong there. And here, I must say, the State Government, later on, made a categorical statement that no chemical lab would be set up there; no land would be acquired there. After this, who precipitated the issue? For ten months, eleven months, how Nandigram became a liberated territory? (Contd. by TMV/3E)


SHRI D. RAJA (CONTD.): It was treated as a liberated territory. Now, what is written? A recapture took place. My question is: Who captured it first? There was a capture. Then only the question of recapture arises. So, who captured and who kept Nandigram out of bounds? The State Government could not function. No school was run; no college was run; thousands of people were driven away and they could not live in their own homes. If you think that they are also human beings, you must have concern for those human beings. I agree that the tears of mothers, whether Hindu or Muslim, Dalit or Tribal, are the same; the blood of children, whether Hindu or Muslim, Dalit or Tribal, is the same. We understand that. Do you have any sense of guilt for driving away thousands of people from their homes? How could it happen? You may accuse that the State Government failed to handle the situation. Even I may think in retrospect that the State Government could have handled it in a different way. That is not the thing. In a democracy, you see how these people were not allowed to live in their own homes and in their own lands. How did it happen? For 10 months or 11 months, how was this entire area treated as a liberated territory? Here I agree that there are other elements. Illegal arms were accumulated there. How did it happen? The Home Minister may not reveal everything. But he has acknowledged and admitted, "Yes, there were illegal arms; illegal weapons were accumulated there". How did it happen? (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P. J. KURIEN): Please don't disturb. Let him speak. (Interruptions)...

SHRI DIGVIJAY SINGH: Who is responsible for that? (Interruptions)... Who is taking note? (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: What is the problem? (Interruptions)... No, please. (Interruptions)... You don't respond. The Home Minister will respond. (Interruptions)... You are not the Home Minister. (Interruptions)...

SHRI DIGVIJAY SINGH: Sir, who is taking note? May I know who is taking note? (Interruptions).... Tell me. Who is taking note? (Interruptions)....

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): There is a Cabinet Minister here. (Interruptions)... There is a Cabinet Minister here. (Interruptions)... No. (Interruptions)... There is a Cabinet Minister. (Interruptions)... Mr. Digvijay Singh, there is a Cabinet Minister. (Interruptions)... In any way, there is Cabinet Minister here. (Interruptions)... That is enough. It is collective responsibility. You were in the Cabinet. You know that. (Interruptions)...

SHRI DIGVIJAY SINGH: But she is not taking note. (Interruptions)...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, she can understand. (Interruptions)... Now, you please continue, Mr. Raja.

SHRI D. RAJA: The point here is that there were some elements, extreme political elements, who were involved in this entire episode and one may call them Maoists. If the hon. Minister like Mr. Priyaranjan Dasmunsi does not like the word "Maoists", we can call them Left Extremists or Naxalites. We should understand that the Left-wing Communism is an infantile disorder. I did not say this. Actually, it was stated by Lenin during his time. Even now, so many years after Lenin, if Left-wing Communism continues to be a disorder, nobody should take advantage of that disorder. I must warn against this and that this disorder must be fought ideologically and politically. This is not simply a law and order issue. We are well aware of that. We will have to go into the socio-economic roots of this Left-wing extremism. We need to fight against it and nobody should take advantage of this Left-wing extremism.

Having said this, I must say that, in Nandigram, we, the CPI, pointed out that the State Government should take the people and the political parties into confidence, and there must be a political process to convince the people and efforts were made.


SHRI D. RAJA: The House knows that Mr. Ashok Ghosh, senior leader of the Forward Block, tried his level best to find a solution. Comrade Jyoti Basu had himself initiated some process. But all these political measures failed and the issue was precipitated. Here I must make a mention of the intellectuals. I have a lot of respect for intellectuals.

(Contd. By RG/3F)


SHRI D. RAJA (contd.): I have a lot of respect for Aparna Sen and all intellectuals and creative artists in Bengal. In fact, I have admiration for Bengali literature and Bengali cinema. Having said this, they should also have some introspection over it because there is an attempt to equate Nandigram with Gujarat. I cannot simply agree to this position. It is well known that what happened in Gujarat was genocide. And, you cannot say that Nandigram was genocide.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Please conclude.

SHRI D. RAJA: I will conclude. Sir, Nandigram cannot be compared to Gujarat. In fact, people are referring to High Courts. Our great eminent lawyer, Shri Ram Jethmalani, was referring to the High Court. The Supreme Court made an observation about Gujarat as the modern day Nero. What could we do with the modern day Nero in the case of Gujarat? We could do nothing; in fact, Shri Ram Jethmalani and others should rise to the occasion. My simple point is, you cannot compare Nandigram with Gujarat. I don't agree with it.

MR. VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Mr. Raja, you have taken more time. Please conclude...(Interruptions)

ֵָ : ָ, ֲָ֟ ֯ ֮ ָ ֵ, ֲ ָ֟ օ Ӥִ ָ ? Ӥִ ָ ӕ߯ן

SHRI D. RAJA: It is a State-sponsored genocide...(Interruptions)

ֳ֬ (. .. ׸֮) : כ, כ..... ӟ Please conclude now.

SHRI D. RAJA: I am concluding. If you discuss on intellectuals, I agree, even the intellectuals are divided. They are also having introspection. I think they will arrive at correct conclusions. But having said this, I must say that today's Hindu carries a report from Chomskey and other intellectuals on Nandigram, where he says: "The balance of forces in the world is such that it would be an impetus to split the Left. We are faced with a world power that has demolished one State, Iraq, and is now threatening another State, Iran. This is not time for division, when the basis of division no longer exists...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN : Please conclude...(Interruptions)

SHRI DINESH TRIVEDI: We also want time...(Interruptions)

SHRI D. RAJA: Mr. Trivedi, you do not interrupt now. If you allow me, then, I will finish. If you interrupt, I am not going to yield. So, Sir, now, we should discuss this issue dispassionately and we should not have a politically motivated debate. If you want to malign the Left Front Government in West Bengal, then, that is politics. And by doing so, you are opening the floodgate for dragging many other issues into this august House. Now, some people are referring to even Tamil Nadu and tomorrow some other people may talk about any other State...(Interruptions)

SHRI N. JOTHI: I am the one who referred to Tamil Nadu.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Please do not talk about Tamil Nadu or Kerala. You try to conclude.

SHRI D. RAJA: Nandigram should not become a precedent to bring any little issue from any State, and Parliament discusses the State affairs. Then, what will State Assemblies do? I am not saying this because I am opposed to the discussion. In fact, the Left was for a discussion, for a meaningful discussion from day one. But some people...

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: That is all explained here. Why do you have to repeat?

SHRI D. RAJA: So there must be a meaningful discussion. There must be a proper discussion. And, now, there is a reconciliation process. Normalcy has been restored, and we should see how the State Government would carry on. It is not that you can scare the State Government. We have issued directives under article 355, and the BJP has made a demand that we should follow it up with article 357. We cannot agree to such a demand...(Interruptions) We are not scared. We know what the people of West Bengal will do. We know what the people of India do. They cannot accept your suggestion to the Union Government. (Continued by 3G)


THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Now, conclude please. Yes, this is the last point.

SHRI D. RAJA: The point here is, when you talk SEZ, the UPA Government should make it very clear. Of late, they have come out with a rehabilitation policy. But, on SEZ, there is a need to have a fresh look and go in for drastic amendments in the SEZ Act and rules, and the State Governments must be enlightened on this position. If you pursue the same macro level, neo-liberal economic policies, then, there will be ways for SEZ in States and that will lead to displacement of farmers, that will lead to acquisition of land. We have an obsolete Land Acquisition Act of 1894. That needs to be drastically amended, and we will have to look at these issues in a larger perspective beyond Nandigram boundaries. (Ends)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Thank you very much. Now, Shri S.S. Ahluwalia. ...(Interruptions)... Beware of the paucity of time.


(The hon. Member spoke in Bengali.)

(Followed by 3h-kgg)


Shri S.S. Ahluwalia:*

SHRI PENUMALLI MADHU: They are proud of it.

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: I know that. You might not have seen but I have seen it. (Interruptions)

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, do not disturb, please. (Interruptions)

Shri S.S. Ahluwalia:*

There has been no notice issued for land acquisition.

Shri S.S. Ahluwalia:*

(Followed by 3n)


* Spoke in Bengali

SHRI TAPAN KUMAR SEN: I was very much there in Kolkata at that time. ..(Interruptions)..


THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): Shri Ahluwaliaji, please conclude now. I think your points are over. ..(Interruptions).. A lot of speakers are there. ..(Interruptions)..

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: I am concluding, Sir. ..(Interruptions).. The real cat will come out now. ..(Interruptions).. *

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: You may please conclude now.

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: I am concluding, Sir. Spoke in Bengali.

"...a part of the CPM claims two of their supporters have been killed by the mines laid by the Maoists who are members of the Resistance Committee (BUPC)." (Continued by PK/3O)