ECB is about differentiating Sikhs
from the word 'Asian.'
Its a Vision to help raise awareness
of Sikhs in the Western World,
their history,beliefs and identity.
An impression has been created that Monty Panesar is the first Sikh cricketer to represent England. The idea is fast gaining ground because even the hallowed compendium of cricket, Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack, mentioned in its 2007 edition that no Sikh cricketer has played for any nation other than India.
This statement, however, is not based on facts. The first Sikh cricketer to play for England (then MCC) was Bhupendrasingh, the Maharaja of Patiala. In 1926-27, Bhupendrasingh played in two unofficial Tests under Arthur Gilligan against India. The matches were held in Bombay and in Calcutta.
Bhupendrasingh was not a left-arm spinner in the mould of Monty Panesar but a hard-hitting right-handed batsman, exceptionally strong with the cut and the pull. In 1911, at the age of 19, he had toured England with the Patiala’s All-India team and had created quite an impression.
After representing England in unofficial Tests in 1926-27, he was billed to lead India in the inaugural official Test match. Actually he was selected to captain India in England in 1932, but official duty made it impossible for him to make himself available. As a result, Natwarsinhji, the Maharaja of Porbandar, was nominated the captain. Ultimately, both Natwarsinhji and his deputy, Ghanashyamsinhji, the Maharaja of Limdi, stepped down voluntarily, which enabled the talented C.K. Nayudu to lead India in the inaugural Test.
Bhupendrasingh of Patiala lost his chance to be the leader of the team in an official Test match. Ironically, the same fate befell his son, Yadavendrasingh, the Yuvraj of Patiala. Yadavendrasingh was a batsman of class. He had immense power in his stroke-play and was a magnificent driver of the ball. Like his father, he had a rasping square cut and could be relied to pull the ball high and handsome.
Fathers and sons
He made his debut in the official Test in Madras in 1933-34 against Douglas Jardine’s team. In the first innings, he was India’s highest scorer with a superlative 60 against the likes of Clarke, Nicholls and Verity. In the next innings, he had another creditable outing, scoring 24 runs. That was the last Test of the series and Yadavendrasingh got no other opportunities that season.
However, in 1935-36, Jack Ryder’s Australia came to play a four-Test unofficial series against India. In the first Test, Yadavendrasingh led India but in the following two Tests, he played under the leadership of Nayudu and WazirAli respectively. Thereafter his career paralleled that of his father’s. In 1932, Bhupendrasingh had not been able to lead India in an official Test match. This time around, his son failed to do the same, although he was the favourite, along with Nayudu and WazirAli, for the captaincy.
Indian cricket, even then, was a hub of corruption and parochialism. The undeserving Maharajkumar of Vizianagram, ‘Vizzy’ for short, was appointed India’s captain to England in 1936 while deserving candidates such as Nayudu and Wazir Ali went as ordinary members.
Worse, Yadavendrasingh could not make it to England. If he had gone on that tour, the whole history of Indian cricket would have been written differently. On that tour, India had a fine set of players. But Vizzy’s inept handling of players led to failure. Unlike Vizzy, Yadavendrasingh would have made a wonderful captain. He would have been able to harness the talents of his players and led them to success. Unfortunately, it was not to be.
Both father and son, though deserving, missed out on captaining India in an official Test. However, the fact remains that Bhupendrasingh was the first Sikh cricketer to have played for England. Monty Panesar is merely following in the great man’s footsteps.
For millions of Sikhs around the world, the names Singh and Kaur are imbued with religious significance. Every baptized boy is given the name Singh and every girl the name Kaur to symbolize unity and to remove names used to identify social standing in India's caste system.
But none of that symbolism mattered to Citizen and Immigration Canada. Until this week when a Calgary woman complained publicly, officials in the New Delhi office of the Canadian High Commission routinely told Indian immigration applicants the surnames were too common to process quickly and would have to be changed.
An Immigration Canada spokeswoman first said the policy had been in place for 10 years to help officials with the paperwork and allow them to identify files accurately. But when the story became public, the department quickly tried to call it a misunderstanding based on a "poorly worded letter" and insisted no such practice existed.
But the letter from the high commission office that Tarrinder Kaur of Calgary received was very clear: "The names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada," it said. Kaur's husband Jaspal Singh was forced to legally change his name in India so his immigration application would be processed in time for the birth of their child next month.
While Ottawa deserves credit for finally eliminating this disgraceful policy, it must ensure that bureaucratic convenience never again takes precedence over people's customs or religious beliefs.
At the same time, Ottawa and its officials abroad must never forget the power they wield over would-be immigrants and their relatives who are already here. The fact that few Sikhs in Canada ever complained openly about the policy is a telling sign of their fear of jeopardizing the immigration hopes of their relatives back home.
Canadians have learned that cultural and religious sensitivity are essential in a nation that prides itself on being one of the most multicultural in the world. One that score, our government would do well to follow the example of the people.
Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla says she's received about 500 complaints in the past three years from constituents as their relatives apply to immigrate.
After a storm of complaints from Sikhs, Ottawa reverses New Delhi office's 10-year decree that `the names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada'
Jul 26, 2007 04:30 AM
San Grewal Staff reporter
One of the most common surnames in Canada, imbued with religious significance for millions of Sikhs around the world, is now, after yesterday's reversal of a 10-year policy, deemed acceptable by the Canadian government.
For the past decade, Indian immigration applicants with the surname Singh or Kaur were told by the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi that their names, too common to process quickly, would have to be changed.
Twenty-four hours after the World Sikh Organization raised the issue, Citizenship and Immigration Canada yesterday announced it was dropping the policy, calling the whole thing a misunderstanding based on a "poorly worded" letter.
It's not known how many people have been affected. Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla (Brampton-Springdale) says in the past three years she's received about 500 complaints from constituents whose family members were told to change their names when applying to immigrate.
The New Delhi immigration office is one of the busiest in the world. Immigration Minister Diane Finley refused to comment, but according to statements from the department, the policy asking for a different name was meant to help speed up applications and prevent cases of mistaken identity due to the commonness of Singh.
It said its New Delhi visa office had reported "very few complaints" about the request and explained that most Singhs or Kaurs often have an additional family name, even if it is not often used, that can be easily added to their passport.
Most of the world's 30 million Sikhs are given the name Singh, for men, or Kaur, for women, usually as a middle name.
But for those Sikhs who choose to be baptized, or initiated into the orthodox order of the faith, their previous surname is dropped for Singh or Kaur to symbolize unity and to remove names used to identify social standing within India's caste system.
"If you have to change your name to come here, we have to ask ourselves, `Are we really celebrating all the great things that are hallmarks of this multicultural country?" said Dhalla, whose riding has one of the largest Indo-Canadian populations in the country.
When asked why the immigration department's policy in New Delhi hadn't been challenged before by politicians, lawyers or the public, Dhalla said she has brought it up to immigration officials.
But she admitted the issue had never made it to the floor of the House of Commons.
"At least not to my knowledge."
Brampton lawyer Harinder Gahir, who routinely takes on immigration cases, says he's had about 100 clients complain.
"But the problem is they are family members already here complaining on behalf of family members in India they are sponsoring.
"The applicants themselves don't want to complain and most comply because they don't want their chances for immigration to be jeopardized."
When asked if he believes the immigration department's claim that the policy was just a misunderstanding and that people with the surnames Singh or Kaur were actually allowed to apply, Gahir said, "They were told, unequivocally, `You can't apply with the surname Singh or Kaur.'"
A follow-up story on the CBC's website includes what appears to be a letter from the High Commission in New Delhi, dated May 17 and addressed to Jaspal Singh.
It states:
"The names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada."
But the department's statement yesterday said that "Permanent resident applicants with the surnames Singh or Kaur are not required to change their names in order to apply.
"In no way did CIC intend to ask applicants to change their names. The letter that was previously used to communicate with clients was poorly worded. We are making changes to ensure there will be no misunderstandings in the future.
"CIC recognizes that previous communications with clients may not have been clear on this issue and regrets any inconvenience this may have caused."
"That's outrageous," said Sat Gosal, a lawyer at the firm RZCD in Mississauga who has helped challenge human rights violations against Sikhs for more than two decades.
Gosal, who was aware of the policy, is glad Sikh organizations finally complained publicly.
"This goes back to my father's days in England, during the post-colonial days of the '50s and '60s, when administrative convenience was the justification for changing names that were too common or hard to pronounce." Anglicizing or at least simplifying names was once also common in Canada.
A Calgary woman waiting for her husband to arrive in Canada is upset by a long-standing immigration policy that forces people with the surname Singh or Kaur to change their last names.
Tarvinder Kaur, who is pregnant, said her husband Jaspal Singh's application to become a permanent resident has been delayed for well over a month because of his last name.
He has no choice but to legally change his name in India so he can get to Calgary before she gives birth next month, she said.
CBC News has obtained a copy of a letter sent from the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi to Singh's family stating that "the names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada."
"Why are we needing to make a different last name?" said Kaur. "You choose what your last name is going to be and if it's always been a certain way, then why should you have to change it?"
Traditional Sikh names
Singh and Kaur are common names in the Sikh community. In a tradition that began more than 300 years ago, the name Singh is given to every baptized male and Kaur to every baptized female Sikh.
The names are used differently by different people. Some use Singh or Kaur as middle names, while others use them as their last names.
Karen Shadd-Evelyn, a spokeswoman with Citizenship and Immigration Canada, said the policy preventing people from immigrating to Canada with those last names has been in place for the last 10 years.
"I believe the thinking behind it in this case is because it is so common. [With] the sheer numbers of applicants that have those as their surnames, it's just a matter for numbers and for processing in that visa office."
Citizenship and Immigration Canada says there is no such policy against other common last names.
Kaur, who was born in Canada, says that's unacceptable.
"If it's going to be a standard policy it should be standard with all common last names. Why is it that it's only Singh or Kaur that's being attacked by this?"
A Sikh-Canadian group is slamming the long-standing immigration policy that forces people with the surname Singh or Kaur to change their last names.
Jasbeer Singh, of the World Sikh Organization, said the policy is incredibly out of synch in this day and age.
"The reason we should be concerned is this is a very sneaky attack on our individual rights and freedoms and persona," Singh said. "Today they are challenging or don't like Singh or Kaur. Tomorrow they will not like Mohammed. And how soon will it be before they are asking all Browns and Smiths to change their names?"
The policy came to light after a Calgary woman waiting for her husband to arrive in Canada learned her husband's application to become a permanent resident has been delayed for well over a month because of his last name.
The Citizenship and Immigration department says the policy to ask people to provide a third name has been around for 10 years. It's used only in the New Delhi visa office and does not apply to any other last names.
Karen Shadd-Evelyn, a spokeswoman with Citizenship and Immigration Canada, said the reason for the policy is that it helps officials with the paperwork and allows them to identify people's files quickly, efficiently and accurately
A Sikh-Canadian group is slamming the long-standing immigration policy that forces people with the surname Singh or Kaur to change their last names.
Jasbeer Singh, of the World Sikh Organization, said the policy is incredibly out of synch in this day and age.
Immigration Canada sent a letter to Jaspal Singh stating "the names Kaur and Singh do not qualify for the purpose of immigration to Canada." (Click the link, right, for a larger, PDF version.)
"The reason we should be concerned is this is a very sneaky attack on our individual rights and freedoms and persona," Singh said. "Today they are challenging or don't like Singh or Kaur. Tomorrow they will not like Mohammed. And how soon will it be before they are asking all Browns and Smiths to change their names?"
The policy came to light after a Calgary woman waiting for her husband to arrive in Canada learned her husband's application to become a permanent resident has been delayed for well over a month because of his last name.
The Citizenship and Immigration department says the policy to ask people to provide a third name has been around for 10 years. It's used only in the New Delhi visa office and does not apply to any other last names.
Karen Shadd-Evelyn, a spokeswoman with Citizenship and Immigration Canada, said the reason for the policy is that it helps officials with the paperwork and allows them to identify people's files quickly, efficiently and accurately.
"You can imagine you wouldn't want your file to be confused with someone else's," she said.
Singh and Kaur are common names in the Sikh community. In a tradition that began more than 300 years ago, the name Singh is given to every baptized male and Kaur to every baptized female Sikh. There are millions of Singhs and Kaurs around the world.
Shadd-Evelyn said that while the department recognizes the tradition of having the names Singh and Kaur, it's their understanding that it is already a common practice for people in the Sikh community to have a third name.
"Generally, when we ask for that, they are accustomed to that and are used to providing a third name," she said. "They have it. It's not something that they're just making up on the spot."
Immigration lawyer Peter Wong said the policy is enforced only some of time. None of his clients has ever officially complained, he said.
"Most people don't find it worthwhile to do and are, quite frankly, scared that they're going to be hurting their immigration applications for their loved ones."
NEW DELHI: Endless buffets, rivers of alcohol and extravagant decorations have become staples at upper-class Indian weddings — but Sikh leaders are considering creating guidelines to tone down the glittering events, a newspaper reported Saturday.
A group of Sikh leaders called for a July 28 meeting of representatives from New Delhi's more than 400 Sikh gurdwaras, or temples, to discuss ways to rein in over-the-top weddings, the Times of India reported.
"The committee feels that ostentatious weddings are leading to increasing competition among families to outdo each other," Paramjit Singh Sarna, president of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, said in the report.
"A lot of money is being wasted," he said.
India's economic growth has surged in recent years, with the gross domestic product — the total value of goods and services produced in the country — growing by more than 8 percent annually in the past four years.
The boom has created a new class of incredibly wealthy Indians who can afford palatial homes, imported luxury cars and wildly elaborate weddings, often at five-star hotels.
The religion of Sikhism was founded in the 15th century by Guru Nanak, who broke from Hinduism, India's dominant religion. He preached the equality of races and genders, and the rejection of image-worship and the caste system.
Sikhs make up less than 2 percent of India's nearly 1.1 billion people.
The Sikh leaders said the deluxe wedding trend puts an unfair burden on brides' families, who traditionally pay for the parties.
"Our fight is against this exploitation by those who pose demands on the girl's family to organize elaborate weddings," the newspaper quoted the group's general secretary, Balbir Singh, as saying. "The ceremony should be simple."
Sarna said it was more a matter of values than taste.
"The idea is to create moral responsibility within the community," he said.
The Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee could not immediately be reached for comment on the report Saturday.
SACRAMENTO — The state Board of Education declined to act Thursday on new complaints from the Sikh community about a seventh-grade textbook the Sikhs say is offensive.
The board voted in March to ask a textbook publisher to remove a picture of Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism, that many followers said was offensive and inaccurate.
The controversial image in "An Age of Voyages: 1350-1600" shows Guru Nanak wearing a crown and with a closely cropped beard. The depiction runs contrary to Sikh faith, which requires observant men to wear a turban and not to shave their facial hair.
Many of the same people who argued at the March meeting were back before the board Thursday, unsatisfied with publisher Oxford University Press' plan to reprint the textbooks and replace the approximately 520 copies that have been distributed so far to 16 California school districts.
The Sikhs argued that the inaccurate picture should have been replaced with a more accurate one, not removed entirely. The revised textbook will have no picture at all accompanying its description of the Sikh faith, further worsening the problem Sikhs said they face when people confuse them with members of other religions, such as Islam.
The book is "wonderfully, lavishly illustrated," so the absence of an accurate picture of Guru Nanak is even more glaring, said Jeff Brodd, a religious studies professor at Sacramento State University who testified at Thursday's hearing.
Those who spoke at the meeting also objected to the title accompanying Guru Nanak's name in several places in the book, in which the word 'devi' is used. Devi is a feminine title, not for men, they said.
"It's like calling a king a queen, a Mr. a Mrs.," said speaker Prubhjot Parhar.
The board didn't take a vote on the Sikhs' request, but Tom Adams, director of curriculum for the state Department of Education, said he would contact the publisher immediately and try to have the title corrected if the new texts have not yet been printed.
Oxford plans to distribute the new books to the school districts this summer, he said.
In other action, the board voted to oppose AB1177, a bill by Assemblyman Jose Solorio, D-Santa Ana, that would set up a three-year pilot project to create alternative instructional materials for about 25,000 English learners.
Board members were concerned the program would undermine their authority to approve all instructional materials used in California classrooms.
San Grewal Staff Reporter In response to what it describes as a “dishonest and highly offensive” characterization made by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a $110 million civil lawsuit was filed today on behalf of the World Sikh Organization against the national broadcaster.
The lawsuit, filed in the Ontario Superior Court in Toronto also names reporter Terry Milewski and Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh for comments they made in a June 28, 2007 feature story titled “Samosa Politics” that aired on The National.
A similar version of the story, which linked Sikh extremism to the WSO and highlighted its ties to the mainstream Canadian political scene, also aired on CBC Radio, with a print version posted on the CBC News website.
The WSO describes itself as a non-profit human rights group established in 1984 with national bodies around the world that defend not only Sikhs but the rights of all people. Representatives would not say how many members there are in Canada or worldwide.
“It is the WSO’s view that the CBC documentary contained significant and numerous factual misrepresentations about the World Sikh Organization,” said Gian Singh Sandhu, a policy advisor with the group’s Canadian body, who spoke at a press conference held today in downtown Toronto.
“The WSO’s lawsuit for defamation, libel and slander arises from the airing of the documentary noted above.”
Sandhu added that the story, which he says was written about in Indian newspapers and mentioned by media in other parts of the world, has resulted in, “significant damage to the reputation of the WSO and the Sikh community.”
A CBC spokesperson said the broadcaster was not aware of the suit until it was informed about the press conference yesterday and that “if and when” the suit was received it would be given “due consideration.” Until then, the CBC will not make any comment.
A spokesperson for Mr. Dosanjh, MP for Vancouver South, said he had not been served as of 4 pm eastern time and had no comment about the suit, but stood behind his statements made in the CBC news story.
When asked what Mr. Dosanjh specifically said in the story that the WSO objected to, Mr. Sandhu said it was obvious that the MP was making a connection between the WSO and Sikh extremism.
A segment of the story included comments by Dosanjh, stating that at the Dec. 2006 Liberal leadership convention in Montreal the WSO exercised significant influence. He then states that a Sikh delegate told Dosanjh’s wife, not knowing who she was, not to vote for Bob Rae.
Dosanjh then states in the story that the delegate said Rae, in a 2005 report to the federal government, was openly critical of Sikh extremists behind the 1985 Air India bombing, and should not be supported.
As for factual errors that the WSO believes were included in Milewski’s reporting, Sandhu said after the press conference that, contrary to what appears in the news story, a man with alleged ties to convicted Air India-bomb maker Inderjit Reyat, named Daljit Singh Sandhu, was never the leader of the WSO.
Another mistake, according to Sandhu, is the CBC news story’s assertion that the WSO released a 2000 press release with the title: “Sikhs did not bomb Air India 182”, which, according to the CBC “claimed that a cargo door fell off the plane.”
“There was no such press release from the WSO,” Sandhu said.
He added that the story’s characterization of a 1984 convention at New York’s Madison Square Garden where Sikhs were videotaped calling for violence, as a WSO event is factually incorrect.
“That was not a WSO function. Mr Milewski needs to do his homework.”
England cricket ace Monty Panesar, the England team’s first Sikh, has been signed as the latest celebrity to front Walkers crisps.
Panesar will promote the new chilli and lemon crisps, which will launch this week, aimed at Britain’s 2.5 million strong Asian population.
The new flavour will include product information in Hindi on the packa
Jon Goldstone, vice president of marketing for Walkers, said: “This is our first flavour developed specifically for the tastes of the Asian market. Chilli & Lemon flavour is already a favourite within the Asian community and, although we believe this new flavour will have mass appeal, we are targeting the Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Indian communities that make up the UK’s biggest ethnic market.
“Walkers Chilli & Lemon packs stand apart from the rest of the range with a ‘New’ flash written in both English and Hindi - a first for Walkers. They also feature an attractive Asian-inspired Henna design. Panesar is this summer’s cricket hero and his involvement will really help us get the message across to our target audience. We’re thrilled to have him as a partner.”
Panesar added: “I’m really excited about my new relationship with Walkers. It’s a new challenge for me and I’m certain Chilli & Lemon will be a huge success within the UK’s Asian communities and beyond.”
Panesar joins football legend and brand ambassador Gary Lineker who has been the face of the crisps brand since 1995. Other celebrities who have appeared in campaigns for the brand include Paul Gascoigne, Sir Steve Redgrave, Michael Owen, Charlotte Church and Victoria Beckham.
Walkers is also launching a £7.5 million campaign in August to promote its decision to end imports and manufacture its crisps solely from UK potatoes.
Earlier this year Walkers Crisps was named the official supplier of snack foods for Wembley Stadium until July 2010.
Walker’s brands include Doritos, Wotsits, Sensations, Monster Munch and Quavers.
Last year, the crisps maker posted sales of over £465 million and became the fourth biggest grocery brand in the UK.
TORONTO - Paramount Canada's Wonderland awarded compensation to a Sikh man after he complained he was discriminated against for refusing to take off his turban and wear a helmet to drive a go-kart.
The amusement park has since asked the provincial regulator to allow it to exempt turban-wearing Sikhs from the helmet requirement, which is standard at go-kart operations throughout the country for insurance purposes.
Gurcharan Dran bought tickets for the Speed City Raceway attraction but was not allowed to ride because of a helmet use regulation, the Ontario Human Rights Commission reported last week.
He filed a complaint with the commission but due to a backlog, the case -- dating from 2001 --did not go to tribunal until last year. Mr. Dran reached a settlement with Paramount Canada's Wonderland last October, which included payment of an unknown amount.
Mr. Dran could not be reached for comment but Kevin Fox, his lawyer, said Mr. Dran "thinks [Paramount Canada's Wonderland] could have handled it a bit better when they told him to get off."
Mr. Fox said he did not know the details of the confrontation, but said Mr. Dran was in his fifties at the time.
Adam Hogan, a spokesman for Paramount Canada's Wonderland, located in Vaughan, said he was unfamiliar with how much Mr. Dran had been compensated and the details of the incident because it occurred in 2001.
But he did say the helmet requirement has not changed at the amusement park since the incident.
"Nobody can ride the ride without a helmet," Mr. Hogan said. "When it comes to safety, we don't make exceptions."
Paramount Canada's Wonderland and other businesses with go-kart tracks are required to enforce helmet use by the Technical Standards and Safety Authority, an arm's-length government agency.
The regulation is part of Ontario's Technical Standards and Safety Act, which also regulates roll bars and seat-belt use in go-karts.
As part of the settlement, Paramount Canada's Wonderland agreed to request an exemption to the helmet requirement for Sikhs from the Ministry of Government Services and the Technical Standards and Safety Authority. Both parties are in the process of reviewing the request, said Tom Ayres, a lawyer with the organization.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission is also seeking an exemption for Sikhs at all go-kart tracks in the province.
"We do take the requirements of the Ontario Human Rights Code very seriously, but this is a complex issue," said Sam Colalillo, a spokesman for the Ministry of Government Services. He said it was too early to speculate if and when an amendment would be made to the helmet law.
Hart Schwartz, the director of the Ontario Human Rights Commission's legal branch, suggested alternatives to the law such as designing safer cars or asking patrons to sign a liability waiver.
But in order to get exemptions to any regulations, there would have to be a safe alternative, Mr. Ayres said.
"No one's been able to give us a measure that will serve the same purpose as a helmet from a safety perspective," he said.
Similar laws for go-kart racing exist in other provinces, but not all. Richmond Go-Kart Track in Richmond, B.C., asks patrons to wear helmets, but only because the business's insurance company instructs them to, said employee Jack Picken.
"If someone with a turban came in, we'd encourage them to wear the helmet, but we wouldn't force them," he said.
Peter Primdahl, underwriting director at K&K Insurance Group in Mississauga, said he would be very reluctant to insure an amusement ride business if they allowed some patrons to ride without helmets -- even if the helmet law is amended.
"Any breach of [safety regulations], should it cause injury, would certainly have an impact on the insurance pricing and would be a very difficult insurance claim to defend," he said.
Religious freedom and helmet use legislation have come head-to-head before.
In November, a case is scheduled to be heard in Ontario involving a Sikh man who was charged with riding his motorcycle without a helmet.
In Manitoba and British Columbia there are exemptions to motorcycle helmet laws for Sikhs who wear turbans.
THE SIKH community has reacted angrily to the selection of Cllr Virendra Sharma for the Ealing Southall by-election.
The Sikh Federation, who lobby for more Sikhs to take part in UK politics, say the absence of women or turban-wearing members of the religion has denied local residents a proper choice.
Jagtar Singh, vice-chair of the Sikh Federation says the process has imposed Ealing Southall residents with a Piara Khabra clone - and had thwarted another chance to get the first visible Sikh' - one who wears a turban - or Sikh woman into the House of Commons.
advertisement
"Our vision is for many Sikhs, born and brought up in the country, to start to taking an active part in politics," he told the Ealing Times.
"We expect the Labour party to not only to look to Sikh candidates but also to ensure in safe Labour seats that we will see a Sikh in the Houses of Parliament.
"We were hoping the Labour Party would have put forward a shortlist including women and visible Sikhs so that Labour members could decide - that would have been the best thing in terms of democracy.
"We feel the Labour members haven't had much of a say - the Labour party aren't giving the opportunity or much of a choice.
"The mould is the same; we have a fairly old Asian MP. I'm not saying he is exactly the same as Piara Khabra,but he is a councillor from the same sort of area or background.
"People are not happy there was a shortlist of two."
The federation has now also warned some of the candidates they feel should have been in the final shortlist may now stand as independents.
They say it has not been overlooked that young professional Sikhs have been overlooked by an "aging non-Sikh" from the long list of possible candidates.
It wasn't long after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that Sikhs living in the United States realized something was terribly amiss. They had a big bull's-eye across their chests, or at least it felt that way.
Sikh men were wearing turbans -- so of course, they must be anti-American terrorists. That case of mistaken identity has been well documented and, for the most part, remedied.
But one young man in the Sacramento area didn't think it went far enough. Harkirat Hansra, a 17-year-old Mira Loma High School rising senior, wrote a book to explain who he is, what he believes and clear up the whole thing about the turbans once and for all.
His book is about Sikhs but not for them. His audience is everyone else.
Although Hansra never felt in danger, he recalls a time soon after 9/11 when someone shouted, "Terrorists, go back to Afghanistan."
For one thing, Hansra was born in San Jose and his parents came to the United States from India.
His book is called "Liberty at Stake" and is subtitled "Sikhs: The Most Visible Yet Misunderstood Minority in America."
It went to press through the self-publishing venture iUniverse and costs $12.95.
Male Sikhs are visible because of their turbans.
As Hansra notes at the beginning of his book, he is one of two students at his high school who wear one.
As most people know by now, Sikh men don't cut their hair for religious reasons. Hansra's hair is now down to his lower back, and he doesn't shave his face.
Hansra opens his book with scores of bullet points about the Sikh religion, hoping that even if people flip through the book and don't buy it, they will learn a thing or two.
One heading states that "Sikhs DO NOT believe in: terrorism or hurting people, hate or racial profiling, war based on religion and converting other people to Sikhism."
He also points out that the turban must be worn in public at all times.
Hansra is in many ways a typical American young man. He is a serious student who dreams of a career in the sciences.
He loves sports and has played soccer for 10 years. He has also dabbled in basketball, baseball and tennis. And he wears a gold rubber wristband, indicating he is a big fan of the San Francisco 49ers.
Because he didn't have a publishing contract and, thus, no deadline, Hansra said he had to discipline himself to write the book in a timely manner. He said his primary motivation was serving the Sikh community. In greater Sacramento, there are an estimated 10,000 Sikhs.
"I wanted to take away the fear of the unknown," he said.
Earlier, he created a Web site -- www.infoaboutsikhs.com -- as a school project to do the same thing.
Time again for "Self-Appointed Censor," today involving a Lodi veteran and others who insist a Sikh temple fly the U.S. flag higher.
The veteran is Dennis Regan, 63, an Air Force veteran. Regan lives near the temple. The Sikhs fly the Sikh emblem higher than the U.S. flag, though not on the same flagpole.
"As a veteran, that offends me," Regan said.
Regan generously instructed the Sikhs on choices that would not offend him: "Maybe they should be Americans first and use their religion second."
In addition to telling the Sikhs what priority their religion should occupy, Regan offered other life coaching. Flying a Sikh flag high alienates people, he explained.
The Lodi community will better accept Sikhs if they don't keep to themselves, he added. He was one of several letter writers who upbraided Sikhs in a Lodi paper.
With due respect to Regan, a country based on freedom of religious expression allows any religious group the right to fly its flag as high as it deems proper.
The protection exists precisely because others, usually others in the majority, want to impose their values. But the Sikh temple isn't about their values. It is about Sikh values.
Besides, flying the Sikh emblem higher than the U.S. flag does not automatically mean - well, anything. Appearances can deceive.
If I were an al-Qaida operative, I would fly a bodacious U.S. flag high outside my home, just to throw off those who place such importance in symbols.
Besides, it's a temple. A temple doesn't need to fly any national flag at all.
If the fear is that the flag's placement expresses more devotion to religion than to country, then the Sikhs are dwarfed in this respect by certain evangelical Christians.
Yet I doubt Lodians are firing off letters to the editor about those fundamentalist Republicans who seem to see the U.S. Constitution as a barrier impeding the spread of their brand of Christianity to every level of government.
Or if the fear is that the flag's placement signals allegiance to the Sikhs' home country over America, the whole Fifth Column thing during wartime, then I suspect the problem may not be flags at all.
It is an increasingly diverse Lodi where some in the majority prefer ethnic homogeneity and the good old days of cultural dominance.
Or maybe it is just a time of fear. A time when others are suspect. When a narrow, judgmental patriotism holds the country in its thrall.
Then again, maybe not. Maybe a civilian can't grasp how hard it is to suspect a flag is being disrespected when your buddies have died for it.
But then, there may be sacrifice behind the things Sikhs stand for, too, as well as the flag they fly.
Then there's the human side.
Lodi's Sikhs must be keenly aware of the federal government's recent terror investigations, deportations and prosecutions of Lodi's Pakistani Muslims.
The Sikhs probably fear jingoistic Americans confuse them with Muslims and doubt their patriotism. They must have nightmares that hostile government agents unloosed by the Patriot Act may appear and destroy their lives.
So the Sikhs may ratchet up the U.S. flag as high as the pole will allow. Then what will be achieved? Hollow flag-waving. As if there isn't enough of that already.
Lodi's Patriot Posse should realize being "offended" does not mean anything to the law. It merely means the Sikhs expressed values with which they strongly disagree.
And possibly not even that. They're flying the flag, after all. They deserve static? Half the Christian churches don't fly a flag. Churches serve a different authority.
I don't know ... calling for submission to majority ideas seems a poor way of selling the Land of the Free.
It would be better to actually visit the temple. To talk to members, not at them. To exchange ideas over coffee or kacchi lassi.
People on the receiving end of that sort of Americanism will wave the flag on their own. Full article
SYDNEY police have circulated CCTV images of a Sikh having a turban ripped from his head while travelling on a public bus after he complained officers did not take the incident seriously.
Inderjeet Singh Dhaliwal said he was distraught when two young men stole his turban - of great religious significance for Sikhs - at Seven Hills as he travelled to work.
The men, who had possibly been drinking, ran off the bus, leaving an embarrassed Mr Dhaliwal to cover his head with a piece of cloth while another passenger laughed.
Mr Dhaliwal reported the attack immediately, but said police did not comprehend the religious significance of the turban or how traumatised he was.
"They said: 'It is not an assault - it is a minor theft,''' he said. "They asked how much the turban was worth.
"I was so disheartened when they talked to me.''
He said police had only taken the March 31 incident seriously after community groups raised the matter with his local MP, Nathan Rees, who in turn wrote to the minister.
Police had subsequently asked him to make a formal statement. "They said they had upgraded it from a theft to an assault or a race hate crime,'' Mr Dhaliwal said.
Police told him CCTV footage was being circulated in a bid to identify the young men.
However, the quality of the footage from the bus-mounted cameras - introduced to stop such attacks - is poor and has so far yielded little.
Mr Dhaliwal said he had also received a letter from Ministry for Police director general Les Tree, assuring him the matter was receiving attention.
Mr Dhaliwal, a father of two from Westmead, called on NSW Police to be better trained in "cultural and religious awareness'' as the officers appeared ignorant about the significance of the turban.
