The Hindu : Andhra Pradesh News : Clauses in pact delay formalising ceasefire

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Jul 19, 2004

Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh

Clauses in pact delay formalising ceasefire

By Our Special Correspondent

HYDERABAD, JULY 18. The delay in formalising the ceasefire declaration between the CPI-ML People's War (PW) and the State Government is due to objections being raised by both sides on use of some words and expressions in the draft agreement.

Though some resilience has been exhibited by both sides use of certain expressions has become a debatable point with the PW out rightly rejecting them and the Government insisting on their inclusion. The end result appears to be further delay in a formal ceasefire coming into force. There has been an unofficial ceasefire in force from June 15 onwards.

The disagreement pertains to a clause introduced by the Government in the draft sent by the PW. The clause stipulates that the PW shall not take up a recruitment drive, collect weapons and explosives, threaten people, summon Government officials and question them. The other is use of expression that `naxalites should not move carrying weapons'.

"We reject these in toto," was how the PW Polit Bureau (PB) member, Prakash, reacted to the Government's assertions included in the draft agreement sent to the Home Minister, K. Jana Reddy, through one of its emissaries, Gadar. In response to the redrafted agreement, the PW once again sent a modified draft to the Government. Interestingly, the redrafted agreement was sent in the name of Rajeshwar Tiwari, the GAD Political Secretary, vide official letter No 78488/SCA/Ai/2004-1 dated June 30, 2004.

During a detailed interaction with a select group of journalists in the Nallamala forest area, Mr. Prakash said that like any other political party, the PW would certainly try to strengthen itself by arousing the masses but not by resorting to violence, as it would abide by its word on the ceasefire. "It's the fundamental right of people to question officials about the schemes being taken up and on the misuse of funds. What's wrong if an official is questioned?" Mr. Prakash asked. He, however, added that the PW would not kidnap any official to be questioned.

His party was ready for the condition that the PW would not obstruct political activity by any party, while the police also would not hamper political campaign by the PW ensuring the continuance of a peaceful atmosphere. However, the movement of naxalite cadres without weapons was not acceptable to the PW. Another disagreement was with regard to use of word on `harassment' of informers. While the PW was for not harming any suspected informants, it was objecting the use of word `harassment'. Mr. Prakash pointed out that it was a too general a term, which could be interpreted in any way. "We will not kill anyone. But what is wrong if people question an informant and warn him not to do so in future," he argued. The PW also wanted the Government to include a clause that the latter shall control `private gangs'.

While the PW preferred to call the draft `ceasefire agreement', the Government apparently opposed it. Its reply sent to the PW contained the heading `guidelines for talks'. The naxalite party's draft includes the point that the agreement shall be binding on the CPI-ML People's War (PW) and the Janashakti group and applicable to entire State.

However, the Government's reply omitted mention of the area of operation of the ceasefire agreement.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Andhra Pradesh