Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Mrs. Alma Matilda Walters on the occasion of her 100th birthday, which will take place next week on February 22nd.

Mrs. Walters was born on February 22, 1903, in Palmetto Point, St. Kitts, British West Indies. She immigrated to the United States in her early teens and like so many immigrants of that era, she entered the U.S. through Ellis Island. Mrs. Walters eventually settled in Jersey City, New Jersey, married and raised her first five children (Delores, Irene, Marjorie, Florence and John) there. Her first marriage ended in divorce and she was forced to raise her children as ``a single mother'' well before the phrase became a part of today's popular culture. Mrs. Walters did so while working as a church assistant and domestic worker to the Lerner family, the owners of the Lerner clothing store chain.

Mrs. Walters worked as a nurse's aide at Community Hospital in Brooklyn's Flatbush neighborhood for many years. She was an active member of Local 1199 and participated in union activities during her working years as well as after her retirement in 1977. She was also an active member of the Miller Avenue Block Association and a life-long Democrat.

Later in life, she met and married M/Sgt. Ulysses Walters. The Walters traveled throughout the United States and lived in Texas, Oklahoma and Georgia before returning to Brooklyn, New York in 1963. Together, they adopted a son, Frank Edward. Mrs. Walters' husband, Ulysses, died in 1975.

Mrs. Walters resided at 399 Miller Avenue in the East New York section of Brooklyn from 1964 until the spring of 2000 when she suffered a hip fracture and needed extensive nursing care. She is currently residing at the Kingsbrook Jewish Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York.

Mrs. Alma Matilda Walters currently has 96 direct descendants who are alive. This number includes six generations. She is an outstanding example of a woman who came to America to improve her own life and contributed in many ways to the success of her family, children and community. She struggled and endured during some of the most difficult times in our history. Although she only had the equivalent of an eighth grade education, she always inspired each of her children to be the best at whatever they chose to do in life.

I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing the lifetime achievements of this remarkable woman, Mrs. Alma Matlida Walters, as she celebrates her 100th birthday on February 22, 2003.

Madam Speaker, today, along with my colleagues, Mr. Upton and Mrs. Wilson, as original co-sponsors, I re-introduce the ``Telecommunications Development Fund Improvement Act.''

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 included an important provision, which I co-sponsored with the former Subcommittee Chair, Mr. Fields, to expand the availability of investment capital to small businesses in the telecommunications industry working to develop new technologies to improve telecommunications services to under-served urban and rural communities. The 1996 Act created the Telecommunications Development Fund (``TDF'') and financed the Fund from interest collected on the initial deposits the FCC required of all bidders in the FCC's spectrum auctions.

Currently, in order to qualify to participate in FCC auctions of spectrum for telecommunications services, the FCC requires prospective bidders to deposit a specified dollar amount with the FCC. Under the legislation adopted in 1996, the FCC places these deposits--sometimes called ``up-front payments''--in an interest-earning account. A ``successful bidder'' is identified through the auction process. The ``deposits'' of the unsuccessful bidders that had been held by the FCC are returned to these bidders without interest. The principal amount of the successful bidder's deposit is paid to the U.S. Treasury. The interest earned on the upfront payments of all the bidders is remitted to the TDF.

Prior to the 1996 Act, tens of millions of dollars of bidders' deposits had been held in non-interest bearing accounts. By requiring that these funds be held in interest-bearing accounts, Congress provided a mechanism to finance the important goals of the TDF without any budgetary impact, without requiring any appropriations and without imposing either new taxes or fees. To date, fifty million dollars has been collected--at no cost to the taxpayer or the regulated industry-- from interest earned on spectrum bidder's deposits. But more could be done to make telecommunications products and services available to under-served communities--rural and inner city--of every kind.

Once the successful bidder has been identified through the auction, a formal licensing process gets underway. At that time, the successful bidder is required to increase the amount of the deposit held by the Federal Government to 20 percent of the amount of the successful bid. The remainder of the successful bid is payable when the license is issued. Typically, a number of months pass between when the successful bidder is identified and when the license is formally issued by the FCC. The interest that could be earned on the additional deposits-- sometimes called ``down payments''--during the licensing process represents a significant source of funding for the TDF.

Unfortunately, despite the language of the 1996 Act--which makes no distinction between bidders' ``up-front payments'' and successful bidders' ``down payments,'' referring to both simply as ``deposits,''-- the FCC has not required increased ``down payment'' deposits of initially successful bidders to also be placed in interest bearing accounts for the benefit of the TDF. As a consequence, small telecommunications companies, and the people in under-served urban and rural areas that might have been the beneficiaries of the technology these companies are working to develop, have been deprived of access to tens of millions of dollars of additional investment capital that the TDF could have made available. This additional source of investment capital would have come from the interest that could have been earned on the additional down payment deposits during the period between the identification of the successful bidder and the issuance of the license.

The Telecommunications Development Fund Reform Act (``TDFIA'') rectifies this drafting oversight to close the loophole created by the FCC. The TDFIA renames the bidders' initial deposits as ``up-front payments'' and preserves existing law treatment of the interest earned on these payments. The TDFIA also defines the additional deposits made by successful bidders as ``down payments'' and treats these down payments the same way as existing law treats the bidders' initial deposits/up-front payments, i.e., the down payment funds will be required to be placed in an interest-bearing escrow account and, upon issuance of the license, the interest earned will be required to be remitted to the TDF.

The amendments made by the TDFIA are purely prospective in effect, applying only to future FCC spectrum auctions. The amendments would have no effect on existing down payments held by the FCC in connection with previously conducted auctions. In particular, the TDFIA would have no effect on the controversy or pending litigation related to the so- called ``NextWave'' licenses, and would not affect any bidder's entitlement to a refund of deposited funds or any bidder's claim for payment of interest on any refund.

The FCC does not oppose these provisions of the TDFIA.

Finally, the 1996 Act requires the TDF to satisfy the requirements of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (``FCRA''), 2 U.S.C. Sec. 661 et seq., prior to making loans. Except for this reference, the FCRA applies only to loans made by Federal Government agencies.

One of the purposes of the FCRA was to ``place the cost of [Federal] credit programs on a budgetary basis equivalent to other Federal spending.'' 2 U.S.C. Sec. 661(2). Consistent with this purpose, among the provisions of the FCRA are requirements for ``budgetary authority'' in an appropriations act to cover the cost of new Federal loans or loan guarantees, 2 U.S.C. Sec. 661c(b), and application of budgetary accounting requirements to loans subject to the FCRA, 2 U.S.C. Sec. 661c(d). These requirements have no logical application to the TDF's funds, which are not subject to congressional appropriations or the Federal budget process. The Office of Management and Budget, to which administration and oversight of the FCRA is entrusted, concurs with this view.

Imposing the requirements of the FCRA on loans made by the TDF has erected an insurmountable barrier to the use of loans by the TDF as a financing option, notwithstanding the intent of the 1996 Act that the TDF be authorized to make loans to credit-worthy small businesses. By making TDF subject to FCRA, TDF would be required to obtain appropriations before it could make loans to prospective borrowers. Requiring the TDF to comply with the FCRA makes no sense from a policy standpoint (TDF receives no appropriated funds) and can only be explained as a drafting error.

The TDFIA repeals this requirement to enable the TDF to enjoy the same flexibility in making loans as any other non-governmental entity. The amendment to the TDF's loan authority made by the TDFIA preserves the requirement that the TDF comply with any other ``applicable'' Federal law in making loans to eligible small businesses. The amendment to the TDF's loan authority made by the TDFIA is narrowly focused and does not affect the existing substantive criteria of the 1996 Act under which the TDF is authorized to make loans.

Madam Speaker, I hope that the Commerce Committee will schedule hearings on this important technical amendment to the 1996 Telecommunications Act and report the Bill to the full House for consideration early in this Session. I invite my colleagues to join me in passing this important legislation at a time when infusion of additional capital investment into struggling small telecommunications companies may help create jobs, stimulate new technology and expand telecommunications services to under-served urban and rural areas of the nation suffering from the current economic slowdown. This legislation can stimulate important economic activity without enactment of new taxes, appropriation of additional federal funds or any adverse effect on the federal budget deficit. I recommend it to my colleagues for their consideration and thank Mr. Upton and Mrs. Wilson for their support of this worthy endeavor.

Mr. Speaker, I was outraged to learn that a Christian missionary, Joseph Cooper, an American, was recently expelled from India. You see, Mr. Cooper came to the Indian government's attention after its radical, violent Hindu nationalist allies beat him so badly that he spent a week in an Indian hospital. He was expelled from the country on leaving the hospital.

Mr. Cooper was expelled simply for preaching, in another demonstration of the religious intolerance that characterizes India's ``secular democracy.'' India has also demonstrated its secularism and tolerance when states ruled by the ruling BJP, such as Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, enacted laws prohibiting anyone from changing his or her religion, unless the person is changing to Hinduism. A Cabinet minister said that everyone who lives in India must either be Hindu or be subservient to Hindus.

The expulsion of Mr. Cooper brings to mind the disturbing case of Graham Staines, an Australian missionary who was burned to death along with his two young sons while they slept in their jeep. After this murder, Mr. Staines's widow was also expelled from India. A mob set fire to the jeep and chanted ``Victory to Hannuman,'' a Hindu god. Since Christmas 1998, nuns have been raped, priests have been murdered, churches have been burned, schools and prayer halls have been attacked, and other acts of violence against Christians have been committed. Over 200,000 Christians in predominantly Christian Nagaland have been murdered by the Indian government.

It would be bad enough if Christians were the only victims of this violent radicalism, Mr. Speaker, but they are not. Sikhs, Muslims, and other minorities are also being victimized and terrorized. More than 250,000 Sikhs have been murdered by the Indian government since 1984. Two reports have confirmed that Indian forces killed 35 Sikhs in the village of Chithisinghpora in March 2000. Indian forces were caught red-handed trying to burn down a Gurdwara (a Sikh place of worship) and some Sikh homes in a village in Kashmir. 52,268 Sikhs are being held as political prisoners, according to a report by the Movement Against State Repression (MASR.) Some of them have been in this illegal detention since 1984! I am proud to have been a signer and sponsor of a letter to President Bush last year asking him to help free these political prisoners. In addition to over 52,000 Sikhs, tens of thousands of other minorities are also being held as political prisoners, according to Amnesty International.

Between 2,000 and 5,000 Muslims were murdered in Gujarat last spring. According to Indian newspapers, the police were ordered to stand aside and do nothing to stop the massacre, in an eerie parallel to the 1984 Delhi massacre of Sikhs. The Indian press also reported that the Indian government planned the Gujarat massacre in advance. Over 85,000 Muslims have been murdered in Kashmir. In addition, tens of thousands of Assamese, Bodos, Dalits, Manipuris, Tamils, and other minorities have been killed by the Indian government.

Mr. Speaker, all of these acts have either been carried out by government forces or by radical Hindu nationalists who are part of the umbrella organization known as the RSS, which was formed in support of the Fascists. The ruling BJP is the political arm of the RSS. This is unacceptable. America must take a stand. We must work to stop these killings and attacks and to get all political prisoners freed. It is time to cut off our aid and trade with India and we should pass a resolution in support of self-determination for the Sikh homeland of Punjab, Khalistan, for Kashmir, Nagaland, and everyone else seeking freedom from radical Hindu repression. The essence of democracy is the right to self-determination. As the leader of the democratic world, we must hold India to these standards of true democracy. Only then will everyone in South Asia live in freedom, dignity, prosperity, and peace.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to place an article from The Hindu on Mr. Cooper into the Record at this time.

U.S. Missionary Attacked

Thiruvananthapuram, Jan. 14.--A 60-year-old American

national and Protestant missionary, Joseph Cooper, was

grievously injured when he was attacked by a 10-member armed

gang of suspected RSS activists near a gospel convention

venue at the Koppam Harijan colony in the Kilimanoor police

station limits near here late on Monday night.

Police said that seven other persons, including a preacher

and his family accompanying Mr. Cooper, were also injured in

the attack. Mr. Cooper, hailing from New Castle in the U.S.,

sustained a deep cut on his right palm. He is under treatment

at a private hospital here.

Mr. Cooper had come to Kilimanoor to speak at the Koppam

Protestant Convention organised by the Puliyam Friends Bible

Church. He and his fellow church members were waylaid by the

armed gang while they were being escorted back to their

vehicles from the convention venue at around 9:45 p.m.,

police said.

The assailants first exploded a cracker to create panic.

They detained the missionary and other preachers for a few

minutes before attacking them with short sticks, swords and

crowbars.

Among those injured are the preacher Benson (37), his wife,

Sali Benson, children Joy and Judith, Jayakumar and Mercy

Christudas. Police said the attackers fled when other church

members rushed to the rescue of Mr. Cooper. The injured were

rushed to the Medical College Hospital.

In a statement to police, Mr. Benson alleged that the

attack was carried out by local RSS workers led by an

autorickshaw driver. Police have arrested Raju (34), a former

Kilimanoor RSS functionary.

The Circle-Inspector (Kilimanoor), D. Rajagopal, said there

was no history of communal discord at the Koppam Harijan

colony where about 60 families lived. Some of the families

practised both the Christian and Hindu faith.

When contacted, the SP (Rural), T.K. Vinod Kumar, said that

police raids were on to arrest the rest of the accused. RSS

and BJP workers, meanwhile, took out a march to the

Kilimanoor police station demanding the release of those

arrested. When contacted, the RSS Jilla saha karyavah, R.

Santhosh, said that his organisation had nothing to do with

the attack. He alleged that the speeches made by the U.S.

missionary and other preachers at the convention were

``communally inflammatory'' and ``insulting to practitioners

of the Hindu faith''

Mr. Speaker, on January 28, the New York Times ran an article about New Jersey lawyer Ravinder Singh Bhalla. Mr. Bhalla won a significant victory for civil rights when he got the rules changed regarding searches at our prisons.

Mr. Bhalla went to visit a client at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where I am from. The guards would not let him in because he refused to remove his turban. Mr. Bhalla informed the guards that the turban is not a hat, but is a religious symbol required of all observant Sikhs. Mr. Bhalla is of the Sikhs faith. He cited his first amendment right to practice his religion and his fourth amendment protection against unreasonable searches, nothing that he had already passed through the metal detector. He also cited his client's sixth amendment right to see his lawyer, a right that could not be exercised unless Mr. Bhalla was allowed into the prison.

Mr. Bhalla took his case to the Federal District Court in Newark. Then on January 17, the Federal Bureau of Prisons changed the policy, saying that turbans, prayer shawls, yarmulkes, and other religious items do not have to be searched. I commend the Bureau of Prisons for this enlightened decision, and I commend Mr. Bhalla for taking a stand on principle. By doing so, he has raised awareness of the rights of the Sikhs in this country and made all Americans more conscious of civil rights for all members of our diverse society.

Sikhs have been subjected to attacks and violence in the wake of the horrible September 11 attacks. A Sikh gas station operator was murdered in his gas station in Arizona simply because he wore a turban. All in all, there have been over 300 attacks on Sikhs. These attacks stem mostly from ignorance coupled with Americans' legitimate anger at the events of September 11. Because Osama bin Laden wears a turban, some ignorant people assume that anyone who wears a turban is a terrorist and an enemy of this county. Nothing could be further from the truth, as Mr. Bhalla showed us. There are over 500,000 Sikhs in this country and they are proud Americans who contribute in all walks of life from law and medicine to farming. One Sikh American, Dalip Singh Saund, served two terms in the House in the late fifties and early sixties.

African-Americans have been through the civil rights struggle; in some ways we are still fighting it. As Mr. Bhalla says, Sikhs are going through many of the same things. By taking a stand for his rights, Mr. Bhalla has expanded Americans' awareness of Sikhs and expanded our tolerance as a society, something that benefits us all.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to place the New York Times article on Mr. Bhalla into the Record.

[From the New York Times, Jan. 28, 2003]

How One Man Took a Stand and Changed Federal Policy Toward the Sikh

Community

(By Ronald Smothers)

Newark, Jan. 27.--When guards at Brooklyn's Metropolitan

Detention Center demanded last September that a Newark lawyer

let them search his turban before being admitted to visit a

client, they may have not have known much about the

traditions of his Sikh faith.

``To a Sikh, removing his turban in public is the same as a

strip-search and as intrusive as asking a woman to remove her

blouse,'' said the lawyer, Ravinder Singh Bhalla.

But Mr. Bhalla, 29, knew quite a bit about the traditions

of American law. Born in New Jersey of immigrant parents and

educated at the University of California, the London School

of Economics and Tulane University Law School, he knew his

rights and was not afraid to list them, one by one.

There was his First Amendment right to practice his

religion, including the ritual public wearing of the head

covering, he told the guards. Then he expounded on his Fourth

Amendment right against unreasonable searches, since he had

already passed through the metal detector without setting off

alarms. Finally there was his client's Sixth Amendment right

to the lawyer of his choice--a right that could be exercised

only if Mr. Bhalla forfeited his own rights.

Mr. Bhalla refused to remove his turban, and the guards

refused to let him in. But on Jan. 17, the federal Bureau of

Prisons issued a clarification of its search policy, after

Mr. Bhalla asserted all of these rights in Federal District

Court here, before the Office of the Inspector General of the

Department of Justice in Washington and, armed with letters

of support from a host of Sikh groups, directly to the Bureau

of Prisons hierarchy.

Dan Dunn, a spokesman for the bureau, said that religious

garments like turbans, prayer shawls or yarmulkes need not be

considered part of the routine searches of personal effects

that prison guards must make of visitors. They could be

searched, he said, if there is a ``reasonable suspicion that

the person is about to engage in or is engaging in criminal

activity.''

What Mr. Dunn described as a simple clarification of policy

is being hailed as a milestone by Mr. Bhalla and others. They

say that by treating searches of religious garments as

distinct from other personal-effects searches and subjecting

them to stricter requirements, the agency is recognizing

their intrusiveness.

``This marks a significant improvement in agency policy,''

said Harpreet Singh, the director of the Sikh Coalition, an

amalgam of groups representing the nation's estimated 500,000

Sikhs. The group was founded just after Sept. 11, 2001, when

many Sikhs found themselves the objects of suspicion at

airports and elsewhere.

Since the terror attacks, he said, his group has won

concessions from the federal Department of Transportation on

airport security searches of Sikhs, given the faith's

prohibitions against removing turbans, as well as the

requirement among the more devout that they carry a

``kirpan,'' or dagger.

Under the department's revised procedures, turbans will not

be searched unless there is a positive reading on a metal

detector. For their part, Sikh groups have agreed that it is

legitimate to require those carrying daggers to secure the

items in their checked luggage.

``But the broader significance of all of this is that we

are educating a broader range of people about Sikhs and our

rights,'' Mr. Singh said.

Sikhism, a monotheistic religion, dates back to the 15th

century in the Punjab region of what is now India. Its

doctrine has evolved through a succession of prophets or

gurus, and in an atmosphere of persecution by the larger

numbers of Hindus and Muslims in South Asia. One of Sikhism's

main requirements is that adherents not cut their hair, which

is considered a visible testament to their connection with

their creator, especially in times of persecution.

Mr. Bhalla said many people mistakenly believe that the

Sikh turban is a hatlike garment molded in one piece. It is

actually a long swath of cotton, 3 feet by more than 15 feet,

which takes Mr. Bhalla 15 minutes each morning to fold and

carefully wind onto his head.

In taking on Mr. Bhalla at the gates of the Metropolitan

Detention Center, guards may have picked the wrong person,

said Gerald Krovatin, a New Jersey criminal lawyer in whose

firm Mr. Bhalla works. Mr. Krovatin said that last November

his colleague was one of the founding members of the national

Sikh Bar Association and the only one among the estimated 50

Sikh lawyers in the country who is a criminal litigator.

Perhaps the seminal moment for Mr. Bhalla came in a federal

courtroom in Newark when he was just 13. He and his father

were attending a hearing for two Sikh community leaders whom

the United States attorney's office was trying to extradite

to India as suspected terrorists.

Mr. Bhalla recalled that SWAT teams and snipers were

stationed outside the court, and plainclothes agents shadowed

his and his father's every step because the judge and the

prosecutor had reported receiving death threats. It turned

out that the prosecutor in the case was the one sending the

death threats, apparently in an effort to heighten the sense

of danger.

Mr. Bhalla said the incident taught him how ``ridiculous''

sterotyping and prejudice could be.

``Right now Sikhs are going through some of the same things

that African-Americans went through, and like them we are

learning the importance of having some political power and

knowing how the system works,'' he said. ``But we are just

starting.''

Mr. Speaker, I ask our colleagues to join me in recognizing the importance of National Burn Awareness Week. Burn Awareness Week is February 2-8, and provides an opportunity to educate children and families about the risks that lead to unfortunate and tragic accidents, particularly for the youngest and most vulnerable-- our babies and children.

Unfortunately, infants and young children face greater risks from burn injuries than adults or older children. They rely more on the adults around them to ensure their environment is safe and free from potential burn-causing hazards. That is why in addition to treating over 20 percent of all pediatric burns in the Nation at their four national burn centers in Boston, Galveston, Cincinnati and Sacramento, Shriners Hospitals focus on education and prevention of burn injuries.

The Shriners Hospitals for Children is a unique charitable organization that has never sought nor received federal, state, local or third party funding of any kind. Additionally, Shriners Hospitals are distinctive in that they offer full physical, psychological, and emotional care to all the children they treat.

The annual budget for the 22 orthopaedic and burn hospitals totals over half a billion dollars, and has an active patient roster of over 156,000 children. It is obvious how important the Shriners Hospitals are to the health of our children. The Shriners Hospitals are 100 percent free, despite the fact that they will spend $1.5 million dollars on children every 24 hours in 2003.

In recognition of Burn Awareness Week, Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to commend such charitable organizations as the Shriners Hospitals that contribute greatly to the care, education, and research necessary to treat and work to prevent children's burn accidents. I also intend to support the Shriners Hospitals' efforts by sponsoring a bill that will help to prevent burn accidents by strengthening the flammability standards for children's sleepwear. I hope my colleagues will help to support me in this effort.

Mr. Speaker, in 2000, the website www.tehelka.com exposed the fundamental corruption of the Indian government. They did a video expose showing high-ranking government officials, including the Defense Minister, as well as the President of the ruling BJP, taking bribes. At that time, it was recording 30 million hits a week. It was quite embarrassing for the Indian government.

On January 6, The Guardian reported that the Indian government has struck back at tehelka.com. It has harassed their contributors. It sent its agents to investigate tehelka, searching its offices and harassing its workers. The website has had to reduce the staff from 120 people to four. All the office furniture has been sold and the site is scraping for money. Clearly the government has set out to destroy tehelka.com, and it appears to be succeeding. Meanwhile, the corrupt officials they exposed are still in their posts.

This shows that India is intolerant of free speech and free journalism. It reminds me of the old joke; ``You have every right to your own opinion as long as it agrees with mine.'' That's the state of free speech and the free press in India. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are cornerstones of a democracy, along with the right to self-determination. The government campaign to shut down tehelka.com is another piece of evidence that India, despite its claims, is not a democracy but an authoritarian police state.

Mr. Speaker, why are U.S. taxpayers--your constituents and mine-- being asked to pay taxes to support this kind of radical, fundamentalist tyranny? We should stop our aid to India until real freedom exists there, including the right of a free press, the right to freely practice any religion a person chooses without the threat of being killed by the government and without anti-conversion laws, and the right of all the peoples of the subcontinent to decide their futures in a free and fair vote. We should work for self-determination, which is a basic right, by promoting a plebiscite on the question of independence in Christian Nagaland, Muslim Kashmir, the Sikh homeland of Punjab, Khalistan, and wherever else it is sought. And we should demand the release of all political prisoners in India and an end to its sponsorship of cross-border terrorism. America is a free country. We seek freedom not just for ourselves, but for all people of the world. These measures will help secure the blessings of liberty to all the people of the world's most troubled region and allow them to enjoy the glow of freedom.

Mr. Speaker, I am inserting the Guardian article on the tehelka situation into the Record at this time.

[From the Guardian, Jan. 6, 2003]

Website Pays Price for Indian Bribery Expose

(By Luke Harding)

Tarun Tejpal is sitting amid the ruins of his office. There

is not much left--a few dusty chairs, three computers and a

forlorn air-conditioning unit. ``We have sold virtually every

thing. I've even flogged the air conditioner,'' he says

dolefully.

Twenty months ago Tejpal, editor in chief of tehelka.com,

an investigative website, was the most feted journalist in

India. He had just broken one of the biggest stories in the

country's history--an expose of corruption at the highest

levels of government.

His reporters, posing as arms salesmen, had bribed their

way into the home of the defence minister, George Fernandes,

and handed over K3,000 to one of the minister's colleagues.

The journalists found many other people prepared to take

money--senior army officers, bureaucrats, even the president

of the ruling Bharatiya Janata party, who was filmed

shovelling the cash into his desk.

The scandal was deeply embarrassing for the BJP prime

minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Mr. Vajpayee sacked Mr.

Fernandes and ordered a commission of inquiry.

The scandal promoted a mood of national catharsis, and

congratulations poured in

from ordinary Indians tired of official corruption. Tehelka,

which had only been launched in June 2000, was receiving 30

million hits a week. But the glory did not last.

``I had expected a battle. But we had not anticipated its

scale,'' Tejpal said yesterday. ``The propaganda was started

the next day.''

Nearly two years later, he has been forced to lay off all

but four of his 120 staff. He has got deeply into debt, sold

the office furniture and scrounged money from friends. ``They

drop by for dinner and leave a cheque behind.''

The website,which once boasted sites on news, literature,

sport and erotica, is ``virtually defunct''. George

Fernandes, meanwhile, is again the defence minister.

The saga is a depressing example of how the Kafkaesque

weight of government can be used to crush those who challenge

its methods.

In the aftermath of the scandal, the Hindu nationalist-led

government ``unleashed'' the inland revenue, the enforcement

directorate and the intelligence bureau, India's answer to

M15, on Tehelka's office in suburban south Delhi.

They did not find anything. Frustrated, the officials

started tearing apart the website's investors. Tehelka's

financial backer, Shanker Sharma, was thrown in jail without

charge. Detectives also held Aniruddha Bahal, the reporter

who carried out the expose, and a colleague, Kumar Badal.

Badal is still in prison.

``It got to the stage that I used to count the number of

booze bottles in my house to make sure there wasn't one more

than the legal quota,'' Tejpal recalls.

The government commission set up to investigate Operation

West-End, Tehelka's sting, meanwhile, started behaving very

strangely. ``The commission didn't cross-examine a single

person found guilty of corruption. It was astonishing,'' said

Tejpal. Instead, it spent its days rubbishing Tehelka's

journalistic methods.

The official campaign of vilification against the website

has attracted protests from a few of India's prominent

liberal commentators, such as the veteran diplomat Kuldip

Nayar and the respected columnist Tavleen Singh. Tehelka's

literary supporters, who include Salman Rushdie, Amitav Ghosh

and VS Naipaul, Tejpal: Kafkaesque situation have also

expressed their outrage. But in general, India's civil

society has reacted with awkwardness and embarrassment to the

website's plight.

``I read all of Franz Kafka when I was 19 and 20, but I

only understand him now,'' Tejpal wrote in a recent essay in

the magazine Seminar. ``He accurately intuited that all power

is essentially implacable and malign.''

The treatment of the web-site's investors has scared away

anybody else from pumping money into Tehelka. The company

owes K620,000.

Mr. Vajpayee's rightwing government has bounced back from

the scandal and is expected to win the next general election

in 2004. Last month, it won a landslide victory in elections

in the riot-hit western state of Gujarat after campaigning on

a virtually fascist anti-Muslim platform.

The murky world of arms dealing goes on. Tony Blair and his

ministers are still trying to persuade the Indian government

to buy 77 British-made Hawk jet trainers, but the billion-

pound deal remains mysteriously stuck over the price.

Tehelka's expose was not about ``individuals'', but about

``systemic corruption'', Tejpal insists. He admits that his

sting operation would have gone down badly with any

government, but says that the BJP's response was venomous.

``The degree of pettiness has been extraordinary. They have

a crude understanding of power and a lot of that stems from

the fact they are in power for the first time. Our struggle

is emblematic of a wider issue: can media organizations be

killed off when they criticize governments.''

The gloomy answer appears to be yes.

Last night Balbir Punj, a leading BJP member of parliament,

claimed the government had nothing to do with the website's

collapse. ``Just because you do a story exposing the

government doesn't mean the gods make you immortal,'' he

said. ``Many other [internet] portals have closed down. The

boom is over.''