Saving the motherland is defamation according to the Goa Miners.

SAVING THE MOTHERLAND IS DEFAMATION ACCORDING TO THE GOA MINERS.
By Francis Sequeira.

If saving the Motherland is Defamation then I will die for the motherland.Francis Sequeira MUMBAI “DEFAMATION IS a serious offence in India; it's both a civil wrong as well as a criminal offence and the aggrieved party can initiate either a civil suit or file a criminal complaint. Or both. Filing a defamation case is a particularly useful SLAPP strategy, a neologism that stands for 'Strategic Legal Action against Public Participation' and signifies all manner of legal action initiated to harass those working on public interest issues,” writes Sajan Venniyoor in an article on thehoot.org, a media related website. G

Green activists from Goa are upset over the Rs 500 crore defamation suit filed against anti-mining activist Seby Rodrigues by Fomento Industries, at the Kolkata High Court. They feel that it is yet another ploy to stifle the freedom of speech of the tribal people of the state. Yet another tactic to suppress the agitating people into silence.Fomento claimed it was being defamed by Seby. Among the other prayers to the court, Fomento made to the Calcutta High Court was a claim of Rs 500 crores from Seby for the damages caused by the blog mandgoa.blogspotthat he manages.Questions are being raised as why the petition has been field in Kolkata in West Bengal, when the same could have been field in Goa state or the Bombay High Court. An editorial in Gomantak Times on the issue says: “The Rs 500 crore defamation suit alters the equation a bit.

While we agree that every aggrieved party has a right to approach the courts for redressal, in the case of Seby Rodrigues, we question why the case was filed in Kolkata and not Goa? Both Seby and Fomento are based in Goa, the mine in question is in Goa, why go to a far off place like Kolkata? One does not have to be Arun Shourie to conclude that the purpose is to transport Seby to a place where he has virtually no support and no access to friendly lawyers and to make it financially difficult for him to run the case. Hence the court case has two objectives – defamation and harassment. This approach was adopted to silence Rajan Narayan when he was editor of 'O Herald' and leaders of the anti-Meta Strips agitation.”It further adds, “It might be important to recall that an earlier attempt to neutralise Seby by labeling him as a Naxalite failed when the proof failed to match up to the charge.

Then, Seby emerged victorious and the sobriquet 'Naxalite Seby' was stuck on him by those who wished to easily identify him in a state, which probably has a thousand Sebys. Nobody is questioning the technicality of whether the case can be filed in Kokatta or not. But if justice is the issue then the case should be transferred to Goa where it can be heard. In other words, the Vice-President (Communications) who has filed the case should play with a straight bat.”It has been filed in far away Kolkata, so that poor Seby will have to travel back and forth endlessly and at major expense. Why Kolkata? Because it is the only High Court where you don’t have to deposit a percentage of the amount you are suing for.

To think that the blogspot run by Seby Rodrigues has caused a loss of Rs 500 crore to Fomentos, which has a mining lease in Colamb village is hilarious. However, the fact that the company has gone to lengths to file a defamation suit against Seby for reports published on his blog is proof that this Siolim-based green is a thorn in the flesh of the mining company. The petition filed by the company lists blog entries which are defamatory to it. We do not intend to discuss whether these entries are indeed defamatory or not. A court of law is the right platform to test this charge and if found guilty, Seby will have to face the penalty decided by the court. There aren't any other issues involved because the blog is not anonymous.

In that respect, Seby plays with a straight bat.Researcher and Lawyer Jason Keith Fernandes writing in his column in Gomantak Times brings yet another interesting story related to defamation: “The case of one Hans Dembowski, who subsequent to his research and the award of a PhD degree published a book, via the Oxford University Press titled Taking the State to Court – Public Interest Litigation and the Public Sphere in Metropolitan India. This book was concerned with the issue of governance in metropolitan India and sought to elaborate the manner, in which the Indian courts are playing a vital role in making public institutions more accountable.”

“Unfortunately for him however, two lawyers of Calcutta High Court, one of them being a government pleader, initiated a contempt petition before the Calcutta High Court stating that the book contains 'scurrilous derogatory and scandalous remarks against this Hon'ble Court' and has 'scandalised and/or tended to lower the authority of this court'. Acting on this petition, the Calcutta High Court in an interim order ensured that the national and international circulation of the book was stopped. Dembowski hangs in limbo ever since.”Did Fomento in fact initiate a dialogue with Seby prior to filing this suit in the High Court of Calcutta? Was this dialogue attested to by some form of written communication? Ideally, Fomento ought to have; in such a case displaying its commitment to an open society and arming itself against the now widely prevalent accusations that it is seeking to harass an activist who is raising valid questions about the nature of mining in Goa.

For all the challenges that Goa has been dealing with, every challenge is an opportunity for dialogue. Unfortunately, it seems that at almost every turn, this opportunity is being rejected in favour of the legal; a route that is really in confrontation with the social.