Bombay court upholds ban on Islam book

The Bombay high court of India upheld in a Jan. 6 decision a ban issued in March 2007 by the state of Maharashtra against the book, Islam — A concept of Political World Invasion by R.V. Bhasin. The court said the book was banned not simply for criticizing Islam, but because its critique was not "bona fide or academic" and that it was written with malicious intent, declaring it to be an “aggravated form of criticism made with a malicious and deliberate intention to outrage the feelings of Muslims." It said freedom of expression guaranteed in India's constitution could not be abused to trigger “senseless destruction of lives and property and breach of public order." It declared as objectionable passages of the book about Jihad, the Quran, Mohammed Paigamber, Indian Muslims, and religious conversions. The court's decision said in part:

"NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 95 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), in its application to the State of Maharashtra, the Government of Maharashtra hereby declares that every copy of the said Book “ISLAM – A Concept of Political World Invasion by Muslims” as well as the relevant translation thereof as the translated Book – “ISLAM RAJNAITIK VISHWA PAR MUSLIM AKRAMAN KI AVADHARANA” shall be banned and forfeited to the Government."

Bhasin vowed to appeal the case to India's Supreme Court.

Critics of the court's decision say it is not the book which was malicious but the "politically driven furor" against it, as one writer put it.

At least 10,000 copies were printed when the book was published in 2003. Police raided the office in 2007 and confiscated all available copies.

Sources: DNAIndia.com, Jan. 7 [Mayura Janwalkar], Jan. 9 [Kareena N Gianani]; OutlookIndia.com [Sundeep Dougal], Jan. 9, with link to full text of court judgment.

Cameroon radio program threatened

A Cameroon military official has urged authorities of Cameroon Radio and Television (CRTV) to remove a Sunday morning radio program, "Cameroon Calling", for its critical reporting on Cameroon government officials. The military official claimed the program harbors a nest of rebels against the station. A Cameroon deputy in the National Assembly is also pressuring the radio program to discipline one senior journalist, Guy Roger Eba, for broadcasting a controversial story about him. The program has run into trouble before with authorities: Tehwi Lambiv was fired in March after he asked a question of a government official considered embarrassing and casting doubt on the country's electoral process; and the entire program crew was arrested in 1990 for broadcasting a program on multi-party politics.

Source: Icicemac.com, Jan. 26.

Assam: Book offending religious leader banned

India's northeastern state of Assam has banned a book considered offensive to Sankaradeva, a 16th century Vaishnavaite saint-reformer of the region. The state is also considering legal action against the author, while religious leaders demand his punishment. The book, Sankar Bibhrat by Srikanta Deva Sarma, a Guwahati-based priest, pointed out contradictions in other books written about Sankaradeva. It is said to have sparked large-scale religious protests around the state.

Source: Indian Express, Jan. 27, 2009; Assam Tribune, Jan. 19.

Salute to David Durant, the Heretical Librarian

David Durant has brought his Heretical Librarian blog to an end, at least for the moment. My impression is that he will be fulfilling a military obligation over the next year and a half.

David's site was one of the few blogs maintained by a conservative librarian. As he noted in an earlier posting, there are not many librarian blogs written from a conservative perspective. Fortunately, David will keep his site up, and I will therefore keep my link to his site, as it is a valuable resource for researchers. David has excelled most particularly in documenting human rights abuses in the Islamic world, but I also enjoyed his skewing of some prominent individuals within the American Library Association who have at times been politically doctrinaire, and have not always demonstrated tolerance of dissenting views, particularly with regard to Cuba.

David has worked as head librarian of government documents and microform of East Carolina University. In the Sept. 30, 2005 edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education, he commented on "the stifling left-wing orthodoxy of modern American librarianship":

"The problem is not that most librarians have liberal or leftist views. It is that the overwhelming prevalence of such views has created a politicized atmosphere of groupthink and even intolerance, in which left-wing politics permeate the library profession and are almost impossible to avoid.

"In conversations with colleagues, on library e-mail lists, and at professional conferences, liberal and leftist attitudes are shoved in your face. Because most librarians are left-of-center politically, they automatically assume that you are as well. After all, only benighted Red State theocrats could possibly have voted for Bush. You quickly learn to keep your opinions to yourself, except among colleagues whom you know well..."

Needless to say, his article was not too well received within certain quarters of the American Library Association.

My best wishes and appreciation go with David Durant.

ALA resolution on Cuba

Five years ago, in March 2003 the Cuban government launched one of its harshest crackdowns, arresting 75 dissidents and sentencing them to up to 25 years in jail after blatantly unfair political trials. Major human rights organizations such as Amnesty International strongly protested this event. Within the American Library Association, the trials were a matter of some controversy because some of those arrested and tried had been involved in a movement to establish independent libraries in the country.

Proponents of this movement felt the ALA was obliged to join with various human rights groups in demanding their immediate release. But some others, primarily activists who consider themselves progressive and belong to the Social Responsibilities Round Table, opposed any action on behalf of these prisoners of conscience.

The result was a compromise of sorts, in which the ALA went on record as expressing "its deep concern over the arrest and long prison terms of political dissidents in Cuba in spring 2003 and urges the Cuban Government to respect, defend and promote the basic human rights defined in Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights." It also joined with the International Federation of Library Associations in calling "for an investigative visit by a special rapporteur of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights with special attention given to freedom of access to information and freedom of expression, especially in the cases of those individuals recently imprisoned and that the reasons for and conditions of their detention be fully investigated." In addition the 2003 ALA resolution/report urged the U.S. to end its embargo on Cuba and other hostile policies.

Now, five years later, should the ALA issue any kind of statement of concern regarding the same situation? Normally, when an organization expresses its deep concern over unfair trials and harsh prison sentences handed out to dissidents, it doesn't then drop the issue completely and never bring it up again. To do so would be hypocritical because such inaction would indicate the organization doesn't care at all about these prisoners. But such inaction is exactly what the so-called progressives within the ALA have urged in opposing a new resolution submitted to the ALA council which demands the immediate release of the remaining prisoners of conscience from this 2003 crackdown.

In contrast, Amnesty International issued last March its commentary on the 2003 crackdown, in which it said:

"On the 5th anniversary of the largest crackdown against political opponents in Cuba, Amnesty International today called on the new Cuban president to immediately release the 58 dissidents still being held in jails across the country, many for contacting journalists and human rights defenders.

"'The only crime committed by these 58 is the peaceful exercise of their fundamental freedoms. Amnesty International considers them to be prisoners of conscience. They must be released immediately and unconditionally,' said Kerrie Howard, deputy director for Amnesty International's Americas program...

"..Fifty-five of the 58 current prisoners of conscience in Cuba are the remainder of a group of 75 people jailed during a massive crackdown against the dissident movement in March 2003.

"Most were accused of 'acts against the independence of the state,' charged with publishing articles or giving interviews to U.S.-funded media, communicating with international human rights organizations and having contact with groups or individuals considered hostile to Cuba. The men were sentenced to between six and 28 years behind bars after what were considered dubious trials. So far, 20 have been released on medical grounds.."

Those who oppose the independent library movement in Cuba saw the failure of the ALA to take a less equivocal stand against the 2003 crackdown as a victory for their side, that is by the ALA not calling for the release of these prisoners but only expressing its deep concern over the trials and imprisonment of these individuals. That in itself is a sad commentary on a rather authoritarian, pro-dictator mindset among some ALA members; but the fact remains that there is nothing inconsistent with the ALA expressing its concern over this crackdown and then calling for the release of these prisoners. One is a logical extension of the other. At the very least, the ALA should inquire over the remaining prisoners, especially those affiliated with the independent library movement; and ask why a UN special rapporteur has not been allowed to visit the country to investigate the situation of these prisoners.

Vietnam reporters arrested for corruption reporting

Two reporters with the state sponsored Thanh Nien and Tuoi Tre newspapers of Vietnam have been arrested for their reporting on a major corruption scandal in the country. Both newspapers have protested strongly, which is unusual under the circumstances. The arrested reporters are Thanh Nien’s Nguyen Viet Chien and Tuoi Tre’s Nguyen Van Ha. They are charged with “abuse of power.”

The Economist noted:

In an unprecedented show of defiance, both newspapers are standing by their reporters. Thanh Nien has run an editorial demanding: “Free the honest journalists.” It says it has been “swamped” with messages of support from the public and some National Assembly members. It challenges the authorities to explain why, if the offending articles had been so inaccurate, none of the police, prosecutors and the ministry of public security had got around to pointing out the errors at any time in the past two years.

Chinese dissident writers interviewed

The Washington Post interviews dissident writers Ma Jian, 54, Xiaolu Guo, in its May 25 edition; both of them now living in London. Ma comments that his "work has been banned in China since my first book about Tibet, Stick Out Your Tongue[1985], became the target of an enormous government campaign in which all copies were destroyed." He is able to visit China but not able to write or speak out there. Guo, who is also a flimmaker, says: "film censorship is much stricter than literary censorship. There are only 200 official films a year, so none of my films has been shown there. My art criticism and film theory were received all right, and my two latest novels [ 20 Fragments of a Ravenous Youth and A Concise Chinese-English Dictionary for Lovers] will be published there soon. I'm not sure if the sex will be censored." See also Los Angeles Times, for a review of Ma's book, Beijing Coma, about a survivor of the Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement, who is "lying in a coma, a bullet in his brain. A piece of his skull remains in the hospital refrigerator; soft spongy skin has grown over the wound. He is blind, mute and paralyzed but still able to hear. From his bed, he recalls his youth and the 1989 occupation of Tiananmen Square, where he was shot."

Book banning in Iran

Jahanshah Rashidian of the France-based Iran Press Service comments May 19 on large scale book banning in Iran:

Recalling not only the book-burning of 1933 by the Nazis, but also the early invasion of Islam in Iran, the regime launched in 1980 a cultural revolution to alienate Iranians from their pre-Islamic great civilisation by islamo-arbising the whole Iranian culture. Following the cultural revolution, bands of Hezbollahis and Islamists attacked, destroyed and burnt libraries in Iran. Millions of books were destroyed, and thousands of allegedly readers of such books were imprisoned or executed.

Not only the Islamic Republic of Iran's Ministry of Islamic guidance and Culture now censors some of Iran's best contemporary writers and researchers, such as Sadegh Hedayat, Sadegh Choobak, Ebrahim Golestan, Gholamhossein Sa’aedi, Ahmad Kasravi, Ali Dashti, Ebrahim Poordavoud, Zabih Behrouz, and others, but even in the recent years, they removed parts and whole pieces of works by well-known poets such as Souzani Samarghandi, Omar Khayam, Molana Jalaledin Rumi, Nezami Ganjavi, Abid Zakani, Iradj Mirza, and even some lexicons from Ali Akbar Dehkhoda and Farhang Mo’in as non-Islamic.

Independent bookstore in Moscow challenged

Moscow News reports, May 15, on the many challenges faced by the Falanster bookstore in Moscow, which has faced many challenges in the years since it was opened in 2002: "It has undergone numerous inspections to check books on its shelves for conformity with the law on extremism, pornography and drug enforcement. Moreover, three years ago, the old store in Bolshoi Kozikhinsky Pereulok burnt down one night, allegedly as a result of a deliberate hand grenade explosion. The culprits were never found." The store reopened in another location, but in Dec. last year it was almost closed on charges (apparently unsustantiated) that it sold pornographic works, and this month was raided by the police. Radio Moscow comments:

What's good about having independent bookstores like Falanster? First, they can sell books put out by small publishers that would find it extremely difficult to get their books to the market elsewhere, especially in a market getting monopolized by huge publishing houses and huge bookstore chains.

Second, stores like Falanster are not as afraid as bigger stores of carrying "risky" titles that may be condemned or even banned.

Independent library movement in Cuba

Marijke van der Meer of Radio Netherlands also reports, May 16, on the independent library movement in Cuba and the support it has received from the Dutch-based Pax Christi. Marianne Moor, a spokesperson for Pax Christi, says:

What we do is send volunteers to see what is needed and then we ask Dutch tourists who go to Cuba to take the books with them in their backpack and personally deliver them to one of the independent libraries. One tourist we spoke with dropped off books in a library they found in a very small house in a poor neighborhood in Santa Clara, and she said the experience was both "very special" and also "a little bit freaky":

A man opened the door. He looked very nervous but he was happy to see us and to hear that we were bringing books. He then very proudly showed us his library, a small room with two bookshelves and a small table. He also showed us very proudly a box with cards in it, with the names of the people who come to borrow books, and he told us it was not safe to have this box in his house. So every night he brought it somewhere else so that when the police came it was not clear who was borrowing books.

Iranian author profiled

From Radio Netherlands, May 16:

"Shahrnush Parsipur is considered one of the most important writers in the Persian language today. But her books are all banned in her native Iran, and she now lives in exile in the United States..." Click here for the rest of the article by Marijke van der Meer.

The Berkeley City Council and U.C. Berkeley

Many here may be aware of a controversy over the last week concerning a decision by the Berkeley city council of California to send a letter to a Marine recruiting center established in downtown Berkeley that it is not welcome here, and then to provide a free parking space in front of the center, along with a weekly demonstration permit, to Code Pink. YouTube videos have shown various demonstrations, including members of another antiwar group, World Can't Wait, blocking entrance to the Marine recruiting center.

This has inflamed national sentiments and led to a strong reaction in the form of the Semper Fi Act of 2008, legislation which would deprive Berkeley and UC Berkeley of somewhere over $2 million in recently earmarked funds, including $243,000 for a Berkeley school lunch program to promote organic and healthy diets; $243,000 for the Ed Roberts Campus, a project that houses offices for disability organizations; $750,000 for water ferry service planned from Berkeley to San Francisco; $94,000 for a police and fire emergency communications system; and $975,000 to the UC Berkeley Matsui Center for Politics and Public Service.

Personally, I think the city council should have the right to say whatever it likes about the Marine recruiting center without fear of losing funding; I also believe that the recruiting center should be allowed to function and people who are curious or interested should be allowed to visit it. But this legislative reaction is way over the top, punishing many people who have nothing to do with the Berkeley City Council and in some cases don't even live in Berkeley.

The issue over the Matsui center is also a library related issue, as it involves donated papers of the late U.S. Congressman Robert T. Matsui, "including documentation of legislative efforts surrounding the North American Free Trade Agreement, welfare reform, base closures and Japanese-American reparations, to be housed at the University of California, Berkeley's Bancroft Library." Click here for press release.

UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau says: "This will be the largest collection of papers at The Bancroft Library from a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and it will be highly valued by our students and faculty and by visiting researchers."

Birgeneau has written to the 52 elected officials in Washington DC sponsoring this Semper Fi legislation, explaining that UC Berkeley has nothing to do with the actions of the Berkeley City Council, but it appears that those pushing this legislation don't care, and want to make this into another battering ram kind of election year campaign issue.

Today's Contra Costa Times also reported on the controversy.

- Steve Denney
library assistant, U.C. Berkeley

Pretoria High Court lifts ban on apartheid book

The Pretoria High Court has lifted a temporary ban on the book, White Power — the Rise and Fall of the National Party, by Christi van der Westhuizen. The temporary ban had been ordered at the behest of Eugene de Kock, an apartheid-era policeman who had objected to a passage which described him as eating and drinking for hours next to "a corpse they had set on fire." De Kock, who had been sentenced in 1886 to two life terms plus 212 years imprisonment for offences committed in the apartheid years, said the passage was totally untrue. Author Christi van der Westhuizen hailed the court's lifting of the ban as a victory for freedom of expression. (Source: iafrica.com)