P A G E
Monday, August 31, 1998
today's calendar
|
E D I T O R I A L P A G E |
Monday, August 31, 1998 |
| weather n
spotlight today's calendar |
||
|
Pakistan:
a retrograde move
Credible
N-doctrine |
 |
Nabha-Patiala
tension |
|
|
|||||
 |
Pakistan: a retrograde move PRIME Minister Nawaz Sharif's Friday announcement to bring in a Bill for the Islamisation of Pakistan is fraught with dangerous implications. It may be a well-calculated design on his part to save his beleaguered regime, but the move is bound to complicate the situation within Pakistan and outside of it, especially in South Asia and Central Asia. This retrograde move, which has evoked sharp opposition in Pakistan itself, will retard the politico-economic growth of that country. More importantly, it will cause social convulsions in the entire region. So far as India is concerned, its serious repercussions cannot be underplayed owing to historical reasons. The reaction of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, though brief, should be enough to make Mr Nawaz Sharif understand that his ill-conceived plan of introducing the laws of Islamic Shariah is pregnant with destabilisation. India, where the roots of secularism have grown much deeper, cannot remain a silent spectator. It has to view with utmost concern the establishment of a theocratic state in its neighbourhood. One can well imagine where Mr Nawaz Sharif's cunningly crafted strategy will lead to. Religious extremism can play havoc with the established civilised norms. The world has before it the examples of Iran and Afghanistan. The minorities in Pakistan will cease to be equal citizens, and the cause of women's emancipation will suffer irreparable damage. The statement of prominent Pakistani human rights activist Asma Jehangir clearly reflects these fears. She is justified in saying that "in the name of Islam, Mr Nawaz Sharif is trying to perpetuate fascist rule". The emerging scenario will strengthen the forces of fanaticism and fundamentalism in a society where different sections within the Muslim community interpret Islam differently. Theocratisation of Pakistan is unlikely to be treated by the Central Asian countries also as something inconsequential because of the complexion of their population. Life in these countries is relatively peaceful as the people there have not welcomed fundamentalist ideas so far. But Mr Sharif's move has the germs which can cause a dangerous infection in that part of the world too. Have Mr Sharif and his advisers visualised what the world would be like then? Agreed that he was in
terrible trouble because of certain factors working
against his government, and that he required to design a
plan to unnerve his political opponents. His political
enemies—most of them are the Pakistan Muslim
League's former allies besides Ms Benazir Bhutto's
PPP—had quite effectively sharpened their attack on
his failures on various fronts. His handling of the
situation before and after the US bombing of the Islamic
terrorist bases in Afghanistan and a pharmaceutical
factory in Sudan had evoked strong condemnation. He was
unable to provide an answer to the Pakistani people's
economic worries, which have increased manifold after the
sanctions imposed by the USA and certain other countries
in the wake of the Chagai nuclear blasts. The successful
anti-government rallies organised by the fundamentalist
Jamaat-e-Islami in cooperation with certain other
opposition groups—highlighting Mr Sharif's dismal
record as Prime Minister, which included the misuse of
his official position to amass wealth on a massive
scale—threatened to create a storm powerful enough
to sweep the government off its feet. But how Mr Sharif
has reacted is not the way to handle a purely
politico-economic crisis. Exploiting the sentiments of
the people in the name of Islam may immediately benefit
him, but in the long run it will spell ruin for the
entire Pakistani society. Does Mr Nawaz Sharif realise
that all moderate politicians (he can be counted as one)
will become irrelevant if he succeeds in putting his
country on the path of fanaticism. The people of India,
who have stakes in the wellbeing of the Pakistanis, would
not like Islamabad to enter the 21st century as a
backward-looking theocratic nation. |
|||||
Mirror, mirror... Sir Don NEITHER the mythical magic mirror nor the latest generation computer would have any problem in identifying Sir Donald Bradman as the greatest batsman the game of cricket has produced thus far. His career statistics in Tests and first class matches are enough to establish his superiority over other countless legends whose contribution to the game too deserves to be written in letters of gold. Sunil Gavaskar, after scoring a record 34 Test centuries put the issue in perspective by stating that Sir Don scored 29 centuries only in 52 Test matches — virtually an impossible record to break. Had he scored just four runs in the last Test in which he was bowled for a duck, his batting average would have been 100 runs per innings. That he invited Sachin Tendulkar for a private audience on the occasion of his 90th birthday — because his wife and childhood sweetheart Jessie, who died last year, confirmed his assessment that the Little Indian Master “bats like me” — has enhanced the respect Indian cricket-lovers have for him. Tendulkar may overtake Gavaskar’s record of the most centuries in Test cricket and may even overtake Allan Border’s record of 11,000 plus runs, but even the Little Indian genius is not likely to achieve the phenomenal average of 99.94 runs of Sir Don when he calls it a day, perhaps, 10 years from now. That he may end up as the best among the “second best” batsmen is a possibility which cannot be ruled out. Who are these “second best” batsmen whose achievements Tendulkar is capable of putting in the shade? In statistical terms only of Gavaskar and Border. And, perhaps, the temperamental Brian Lara whose record 375-run knock in Test cricket and an innings or 500-plus in first class cricket would make even the best batsman in contemporary cricket give up the chase. There are certain records
which Tendulkar will never be able to surpass no matter
how consistently he plays. For instance, Gavaskar’s
774 runs in the first four Tests of his career. Or,
Mohammad Azharuddin’s centuries in each of the first
three Tests of his career — he may have scored a
fourth century had Gavaskar not declared the innings in
the domestic series against England in which Azhar was
still at the crease with a well-compiled 54 runs. The
celebration of Sir Don’s birthday should also serve
as an occasion for the sport administrators in the
country to reflect on how we treat our heroes. Except for
Milkha Singh, there are few Indian sportsmen who are
remembered for their achievements. Dhyan Chand is to
hockey what Sir Don is to cricket. But the event managers
have no time to organise a Bradman-type bash at least on
the hockey legend’s birth anniversary which may
inspire the current crop of Indian hockey players to lift
their game to the golden heights of yore. They may
advance the argument that Dhyan Chand is dead. What about
Balbir Singh, the hockey player who performed the golden
hat-trick of being in the Indian hockey Olympic teams in
1948, 1952 and 1956? Had the country accorded to him the
status of a national hero for his contribution to Indian
hockey, he may not have migrated to Canada where he is
leading a life of “prosperous obscurity”. The
international cricket community felicitated Sir Donald
Bradman on his 90th birthday because someone had the good
sense to organise a special party to celebrate the
occasion. It made the cricketing fraternity remember the
fact that during his playing days if Sir Don got into the
90s, “he was sure to convert it into a
century”. To that we say “amen” as the
legend takes fresh guard to score those crucial 10 runs
in the “innings of life”. |
CREDIBLE N-DOCTRINE IT is becoming increasingly apparent that before conducting the nuclear tests in May this year, New Delhi had not thoroughly examined the strategic implications as well as realistically assessed the global reaction to an open display of its nuclear capability. We have patted ourselves on the back for outwitting the global intelligence networks to achieve a complete surprise. Unfortunately, in the bargain we too were caught unprepared. Consider how much more comfortable our diplomatic position would have been today if we had positioned arrangements to brief world leaders and the Press immediately after the tests were conducted. This could have been easily arranged without divulging our intentions prematurely. Even the belated justification of linking the need to conduct the tests to a nuclear threat from China was not well considered. This China-specific legitimacy has done a great deal of damage to our relations with that country. Even today much of what has been divulged of our thinking bearing upon our nuclear policy and doctrine is rather sketchy. From time to time the Prime Minister has declared that in the fragile security environment that surrounds us, our nuclear capability is intended as a deterrent against a nuclear threat, intimidation or blackmail; there will be no first use against any nuclear weapon state and no use against any non-nuclear state; and there will be a unilateral moratorium on further testing. Apart from these declarations, which are undoubtedly steps in the right direction, there is no convincing indication that we have evolved a comprehensive doctrine and crafted an infrastructure to integrate this awesome capability into our state policy as well as national security. To do so would not be hawkish. We are uncomfortably placed between two nuclear states, one of which is openly hostile and the other strategically rivalistic. While we must pursue our objective of equitable global nuclear disarmament, we must fashion and launch such statecraft as would enable us to reconcile the imperatives of our security with valid global concerns regarding nuclear proliferation. Our initiatives would lack a convincing force unless we craft a credible nuclear doctrine and implement it. The intercontinental reach of the combination of nuclear weapons and missiles has vastly increased the territorial scope and destructive potential of warfare. By the end of World War II, especially after two Japanese cities had been wiped out by nuclear bombs, it had become forcefully apparent that total wars, which involved combatants and civilian population alike, were no longer profitable or cost-effective. The subsequent development of intercontinental ballistic missiles tipped with nuclear warheads has made this conclusion even more forcefully relevant. As a consequence, while the concept of armed power as an instrument of state policy still holds true, the dynamics of the actual employment of armed power have undergone a significant change. A total war is no longer a viable option. By now it is well evident that nuclear weapons are not for fighting but are to deter wars. The deterrence would be largely strategic, which renders a total war, whether nuclear or with conventional forces, a very prohibitive option. The nuclear deterrence to be credible must be so crafted and projected as to fully convince a potential adversary that we possess the nuclear weapons in a mode ready to be used; a matching means of delivery which can effectively penetrate his defence environment; a residual secondary strike capability which can inflict unacceptable damage; means of effective target acquisition; a decisive political will and the necessary command, control, deployment and delivery infrastructure to deliver a devastating nuclear counter-strike. During the Cold War, Western powers led by the USA formulated a doctrine for use of tactical nuclear weapons to offset the decisive superiority of the erstwhile Eastern bloc over the NATO land forces in Europe. In the course of time, it was, however, realised that this limited use of nuclear weapons could not be limited to a tactical battlefield with an assured certainty. There could be scenarios where a country, into which an adversary had made deep inroads, may be tempted to use a tactical nuclear weapon as a last resort, thereby inviting a counter-nuclear strike. The results can be disastrous for both sides. It is, therefore, logical to consider that tactical nuclear weapons are not a workable option. What ought to be the size
of our nuclear arsenal? Considering the immense
destructive power of these weapons, minimum credible
deterrence can be ensured by a combination of a limited
number, which can cause unacceptable damage to a
potential aggressor, backed by a certainty of possession
and an effective delivery system. Since we have
propounded a doctrine of “No first use”, the
weapons, the delivery systems and their deployment should
be such that sufficient numbers escape the
adversary’s first use strike, to deliver a
prohibitive retaliation. The viable number can be
determined by an assessment of targets vital for the
survival of the potential adversary and the likely damage
to our capability to retaliate. The delivery systems available to us are aircraft and ballistic missiles. Aircraft would be more accurate but can be intercepted. On the other hand, the comparative area delivery by a missile is to a great extent offset by the destructive spread of a nuclear warhead over a very large area. The added advantages are that the missiles are cheaper, very hard to intercept and difficult to neutralise by a pre-emptive strike. Submarines, as launch platforms for missiles, offer a high degree of flexibility and a much greater first strike survival capability, but it will take time for us to develop this weapon system. Both versions of Prithvi and Agni can deliver nuclear warheads. Their present ranges would ensure adequate deterrence against Pakistan. However, against a deeper deployment of its launch pads by a potential enemy in our geostrategic environment; to acquire greater flexibility in targetting and deployment and to ensure a more assured first strike survival capability, there is a requirement to continue the development of Agni to achieve an effective operational range of 5000 km. A potential nuclear armed enemy in our geophysical environment poses an ever present nuclear threat, which requires a matching state of readiness. For a credible deterrence, our state of deployment and readiness should preferably be such that a counter-strike can be launched the movement a hostile launch is detected and before it can damage our retaliatory resources. Our capability to detect the hostile launch and the anticipated time it would take to hit the intended targets would decide the feasibility of this course of action. Equally relevant would be to consider the vital need to ensure that the first strike survival of our resources is adequate to deliver a crippling retaliation. In the case of Pakistan, which poses the highest risk of a first strike against us, it would take less than five minutes for a missile to hit its intended target in India after its launch. At present, we do not possess a ground-based detection and early warning system, which can pick up a hostile launch or an approaching missile. Besides the high cost, any system for this purpose would require highly advanced technical inputs and considerable time to develop. The alternative option of aerial surveillance with low earth orbiting satellites may pick up pre-launch activities, which may not by itself be very conclusive. Since the gap between the launch and the hit is so short, detection of the actual launch and flight of the hostile missile powers would require satellite passes in such frequency as to make it virtually unrealistic. In this scenario, we would become aware of a nuclear strike only when we are actually hit. Against this kind of a threat, it would not be pragmatic to maintain an instant retaliation state of deployment and readiness. Any nuclear weapon system, deployed prematurely or for a prolonged duration, is likely to be detected and destroyed in the first strike. The deployment would have to be closely related to the effective range of the enemy’s missiles and an estimation of an imminence of a nuclear strike or immediately an actual hostile strike is experienced. The storage and state of readiness of the weapon systems will have to be closely related to these considerations as well as security, safety and prevention of a premature launch by mistake. It is well evident that effective integration of nuclear weapons into our armed power and the meaningful exploitation of their potential would require a critically well enmeshed and fine-tuned process of resource availability, intelligence, target acquisition, state of readiness and deployment, speedy and effective decision-making, a highly credible projection of our capability to retaliate and convincingly demonstrated political will to use nuclear power for effective deterrence. The eventual decision to employ nuclear weapons must rest with the Prime Minister, assisted by the Defence Minister, head of the National Security Council, who may well be a Cabinet Minister and the Chief of the Defence Staff (in the absence of this entity, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff). It would be desirable for
the President to be also consulted if the time and
situation permits. Since we have decided to abjure the
first strike, we must have in place a clearly designated
alternative decision making and command and control
arrangement to cater for loss/damage by the enemy’s
first strike. The creation of a separate composite
strategic command to handle our nuclear weapons is
absolutely vital. Equally essential are the means and
infrastructure for surveillance of the likely launch
sites so that the preparations for and actual hostile
launch, if possible is instantly detected, information
for targetting our own nuclear weapons and very
dependable communications. While it is understandable that most of these organisations and activities would be kept under a security wrap, it is very essential for the government to assure the nation that the formulation of a credibly workable doctrine and the structure to implement it are well in hand. How would our own and the potentially hostile nuclear capabilities in our geostrategic environment affect conventional armed power and its operations? In the run-up to a potential conflict between us and a nuclear weapons armed adversary, there is likely to be a strategic nuclear operational parity and a mutual deterrence will operate. Since we have declared a policy of “No first use”, a potential enemy superior to us in conventional armed power may not be effectively deterred from launching a conventional operation against us. We have, therefore, to build and maintain conventional armed power of an order that would enable us to not only effectively deal with a conventional threat against us but also to provide the option to undertake decisive operations into the enemy territory. A credible combination of a minimum adequate strategic nuclear deterrence and a conventional armed power of a similar deterrence are vital for dependable security under all foreseeable threats and situations. Nuclear weapons will substantially add to the deterrence imposed by a very high cost of uncontrolled conventional conflagrations. Armed power will be increasingly channelled into limited conflicts, in which the risk of escalation is not high or can be controlled. The other options open would be proxy wars, militancy, armed unrest and terrorism, all of which can be abetted and supported from outside without any overt physical or military involvement. We have been experiencing such employment of armed power as an instrument of Pakistan’s policy in Kashmir and to a lesser extent throughout the rest of India. Besides strengthening our internal security, other courses open to us to combat such operations are hot pursuit into the adversary’s territory, retaliation against its mounting bases and operations with limited objectives across the border. Such courses of action have been adopted by the UN in Iraq and very recently by the USA by mounting punitive missile and air strikes on terrorist bases in Afghanistan and Sudan. Even if such operations are mounted against a nuclear weapon state, it is highly unlikely that a nuclear strike, which would invite a prohibitive counter-strike, would be precipitated. Intelligence gathering and its appraisal, policy formulation, decision making at all levels, and operational planning and execution would need fine-tuning. India must continue to promote just and equitable global nuclear disarmament. Till that goal is effectively achieved, and in view of nuclear threats from our geo-physical environment, it is also vital in the interest of our national policy and security to put into place a well-considered nuclear doctrine and an infrastructure to implement it. (The writer is a
retired Major-General.) |
NAM as shield for Third World AS Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee prepares to attend the twelfth nonaligned movement (NAM) summit in Durban, India’s commitment to the principles and objectives of NAM, implying the freedom of choice and independence of action, remains as strong as ever. It is a false assertion that NAM is losing its importance in the world context. Perhaps the very size of NAM — 113 member-states — with its members often having varied and at times conflicting interests, has become the reason for its declining leadership role. It is, therefore, important for the founder- members of the movement, countries like India, to work relentlessly for revitalisation and rejuvenation of the role of NAM, especially in regard to the need to promote and safeguard the interests of the developing countries. It is hoped that at the Durban summit, India, South Africa and other like-minded countries will play a constructive role in promoting South-South cooperation and interaction with the North by addressing the inequalities and severe imbalances in the distribution of economic and political power in the world. The need for the democratisation of international relations is best reflected in South African as also Indian desire for reform and restructuring of the United Nations in general and the Security Council in particular. Here South Africa’s position is consistent with the Organisation of African Unity’s common stance, which calls for the expansion of the Security Council in both permanent and non-permanent categories to a total of 26 members. Of the 26 members, five non-permanent and two permanent seats should be allocated to Africa. Wittingly or unwittingly,
NAM has also come round to the African position, which at
the Cartagena (Colombia) ministerial meeting this May
pointed to the gross under-representation of the
developing countries in the UN Security Council, and
called for the addition of 11 members, totalling 26. But
it remains to be seen whether NAM will let Africa have
two permanent members as demanded by the OAU. As to the priorities of NAM at the Durban summit, the West Asian peace process, the problems of Africa, Afghanistan, Kosovo, global nuclear disarmament, terrorism, the problems of drugs, external debt of the developing world, the East Asian economic crisis and the environment are some of the important issues facing the movement. To address them meaningfully, the movement must maintain its cohesiveness and work in a spirit of consensus. NAM has also a role to play in the WTO negotiations to advance and protect the trading rights and opportunities of the developing countries and in muscling up their negotiating positions and skills. The movement has to stand up to the arbitrary economic sanctions against the developing countries and to the unfair cutting down of trade quotas with a view to protecting the economies of the developed North. In the light of the recent American missile attacks on Sudan and Afghanistan following the bombing of American embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam, the question of the terrorism receives special attention. At the Cartagena NAM ministerial meeting in May, India firmly called for fighting cross-border terrorism, since it threatened peace and stability at the national and international levels, and undermined the integrity of the affected states. India’s Minister of State for External Affairs Vasundhara Raje asked the Cartagena NAM meeting to condemn all kinds of terrorism, particularly the vicious form of cross-border terrorism, its perpetrators and supporters. She said terrorism destroyed social structures, disrupted democratic institutions and blocked economic growth and development. It is in view of this that Prime Minister Vajpayee on August 22 approved of the US raids on apparent terrorists camps in Sudan and Afghanistan and said that his government would support any international initiative against terrorism. He disagreed with the view that the unilateral US action amounted to an act of state terrorism. “I do not think this is state terrorism. I am not supporting America, but we are for international initiative against terrorism. ”Elimination of cross-border terrorism in Kashmir perpetrated by Pakistan is an extremely important issue for India. It was a major victory for India when the nonaligned nations meeting in Cartagena, soon after Indian nuclear tests, slammed nuclear weapons states for hindering the process of nuclear-free world and declared that peace and security was essential for the development of the member-states. There is no gainsaying the
fact that India will succeed in getting nuclear
disarmament inscribed in the NAM declaration as a matter
of priority. — IPA |
NABHA: As different accounts regarding the efforts of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee’s deputation for reconciliation between Nabha and Patiala, and about His Highness Maharaja Sahib Malvendra Bahadur of Nabha’s inability to see the Sikh representatives are being published in the Press, and spreading some misunderstanding, it is only proper to publish the following letter, which was addressed to His Highness the Maharaja Sahib Bahadur of Nabha by the General Secretary of the SGPC on 4th instant. To His Highness, Maharaja Ripudaman Singh, Malvendra Bahadur of Nabha. Your Highness, I am sorry to learn that Your Highness is indisposed and, therefore, could not find it convenient to grant an interview to the representatives of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee who were sent to approach directly the Rulers of Patiala and Nabha in order to remove the existing tension between the two states. They had the opportunity of discussing this matter freely with His Highness of Patiala and felt encouraged to proceed to Nabha even though no definite reply had been vouchsafed by Your Highness to the request of the SGPC about an interview. They had great confidence that their loving appeal coming from the heart of the Panth would not fail in producing the desired effect. —
Bhagat Jaswant Singh, General Secretary
|
Beant Singh — a tribute ONE can understand the message borne by the pithy saying that “Art is long and time is short”, but it is seldom exemplified. The life and work of Beant Singh reads like a piece of history of a distant past. Alexander the Great came like a wind and went back like a whirlwind. Beant Singh’s period was too short. His work was too difficult. His end was too tragic. It is a sad irony of fate that he died at the prime of his executive-cum-political power, just in front of the Punjab Civil Secretariat, Chandigarh, as Chief Minister. He was a son of the soil in the real sense. He started his political career at the village level. As sarpanch of Bilaspur village, Ludhiana, he gained respect as a doer. I was a fellow sarpanch of my own village, Jassowal. We would often meet each other and discuss many things for the uplift of the rural people. In the formative years his main focus was his village and the neighbouring areas. As chairman of the Block Samiti, Doraha, he studied the problems of the assembly constituency. Gian Singh Rarewala, the Chief Minister of the then Pepsu state, had a political base there. Beant Singh defeated him, and after that he consolidated his base and expanded it with the common sense of a peasant. I have had the occasion to closely watch Beant Singh as a soldier, as a ploughman, as a player, as a tyreless cyclist, as a herdsman — the qualities he acquired from his father, the late Capt Hazoora Singh. His mother, Sahib Kaur, blessed him with the qualities of a polite, quite and gentle person. Beant Singh encouraged young persons to adopt scientific methods of progressive farming. He relished tractor-driving. He was a keen mechanic. He loved to do manual work. He was a thoroughly practical person and a dependable friend. I remember when he headed the Ludhiana District Congress Committee. Later on, he became the leader of the Congress Legislature Party and a minister. Both of us were simultaneously members of the Punjab Assembly. I was also the Vice-President of Punjab Congress Committee. He was closest to me during the Congress organised satyagrah in 1978 as a jail inmate. His contribution to the state is manifold as President of the PPCC and as Chief Minister of Punjab. Beant Singh was a man of
faith and courage. Many a time he was warned by friends
of the dangers ahead. He was careful about
self-protection, but more concerned about restoring
peace, progress and tranquillity in the state. He was a
genuine patriot admired by his friends and feared by his
enemies. He filled the political vacuum in the state. He
was aware of the danger to his life. It is no secret that
he was the focus of total enemy power. On my 60th
birthday he visited my native village. He walked among a
lakh of people half a kilometre leaving his guards behind
on April 30, 1995. He shook hands with many old friends
and admirers. He felt a sigh of relief a kind of freedom
among the cultural loving peasantry. He delivered an
emotional speech. He shared his experience of politics.
He touched the feet of my mother who blessed him. Alas!
all is gone like a dream. Beant Singh was a great person.
He is a living force, torch-bearer, whose contribution in
rebuilding Punjab will be remembered for all time to
come. |
People’s Commission: an overkill
THE charge: extra-legal killings and abductions by State officials. The remedy: extra-judicial “adjudication” and punishment, or reparation, by private citizens acting as “judges”. Or, former Judges “sitting” as judges to exercise a “judicial” power they no longer possess, if you wish to be more precise. The extra-judicial (in other words) masquerading as judicial with a promise of redressal for official actions alleged to be extra-legal. The legal theatre of the absurd, with due apologies to Franz Kafka. But that is what the People’s Commission on Human Rights Violations in Punjab, now in the eye of a brewing storm, ultimately boils down to. Set up by the Committee for Coordination on Disappearances in Punjab (CCDP), the three-member People’s Commission held its first three-day “court” at Chandigarh three weeks ago. And issued notices to dozens of police officers, calling upon them to answer, before the next sitting, the charges levelled against them and to “defend” themselves before the Commission. The troika of retired High Court Judges comprising the Commission appears to be taking its post-retiral “assignment” rather seriously. A People’s Commission is a “people’s court” and a people’s court must, by definition, reach out to the people wherever they are. The first sitting at Chandigarh, the next (already announced) at Ludhiana from October 23 to 25. And so on, presumably, all over Punjab. The Supreme Court and High Courts may, in their unwisdom, dismiss suggestions for setting up circuit Benches but this court, the People’s Commission, is a peripatetic circuit court. And a “court” that will sit in judgement over all other courts of law. The People’s Commission, says Article 5, clause 2 of the Commission’s “Rules” released by the CCDP last week, can enquire into the conduct of persons who have already been tried by a court of law if it can be established “that the court proceedings were not impartial or independent, and were designed to shield the accused from criminal responsibility, or the case was not diligently prosecuted.” It is anybody’s guess whether this Article, on the face of it, exceeds the law of contempt of court. Contempt apart, for retired Judges to hold public sittings and pass judgement on whether sitting Judges, or subordinate judicial officers, are “impartial or independent” or have acted in individual cases in a manner “designed to shield the accused from criminal responsibility” cannot but be characterised as a gross impropriety. The publicised
“trial” by the People’s Commission of
cases which are pending or subjudice before regular
courts of law, permitted by clause 1 of Article 5, could
also impinge on the law of contempt in the same measure
as the phenomenon of “trial” by the Press. Not surprisingly, the Commission is already besieged by — to quote the CCDP’s own words — “misconceptions, insinuations and apprehensions”. Disclaiming any intention to argue with the “myriad forces of insanity and the malevolent masters of subterfuge”, without condescending to identify them, the CCDP sought last week to justify the setting up of the Commission and to protect it from the charge of being totally one-sided and militant-friendly in its approach. And ended up by confirming the worst fears of the doubting Thomases. The terms of reference of the Commission, says the CCDP, are very wide and include investigations into all cases of human rights violations, whether committed by State agencies or by militants. But, adds the Committee in the same breath, the “documentation projects” undertaken by it and presented before the Commission, “keep the focus on the victims of state power.” It is “open”, it goes on to say, in an expression of large-heartedness that it obviously believes will disarm its detractors, it is open to all the alleged victims of militant violence, including police widows (who have reportedly threatened to demonstrate against the Commission at its next sitting), to approach the People’s Commission. The Commission, assures the CCDP (speaking on its behalf), would treat them equally with other complainants. But, it adds and there lies the rub, “in our opinion, it is futile to make indignant condemnation of militant violence that plagued Punjab....” Incomplete though it is, that last line (reading between the lines) sufficiently sums up the Committee’s position on the point. The larger question that the setting up of the People’s Commission throws up is even more disturbing. And it has already been publicly noticed. “To hold a private public trial before the cases are sent to the court,” says a letter to the Editor of this paper, published but two days ago, “is objectionable from the legal, moral and political point of view.” Sent by the chief law functionary of the State, Punjab’s Advocate General, though in his personal capacity, the letter is remarkably forthright. The only sanction behind the People’s Commission, it says, is “its capacity to blackmail the officers who under law cannot appear before the Commission. Judges can exercise only those powers which are vested in them by law. Do retired Judges have more power? If today such private courts are permitted to function, tomorrow we will have a private High Court and a private Supreme Court. Does the concept of equality and freedom in our Constitution mean this?” Whichever way one looks at
it, the People’s Commission is an affront to
justice, if not a travesty of it. |
Adulteration leads to scare
I HADbeen away to the valley for most part of last week and on returning last Monday the first news to hit was of those dead in that span. The long list of those that perished includes Protima Bedi who died in Kumaon (Garhwal Hills), and also those dead and the still dying here in the capital city of India because of adulterated mustard oil. Ironical it may sound but the number of the 26 dead in New Delhi because of adulterated oil in the last one week (till 28 August) far exceeds those reported killed in any of the disturbed sectors of the country in that very week. The government administration can very well show helplessness at not being able to combat insurgency at the borders but don’t tell me its efficiency and intelligence networking has reached such lows that it cannot check the adulterations going around right under its nose? Surely, there cannot be a foreign hand in this too. Anyway, now after 26 innocent people have died in Delhi alone, ministers are busy giving speeches and the typical ‘dos’ and ‘don’ts’ are issuing from their adulterated mouths. A very visible and immediate side effect of this adulteration has been that business at the restaurants and eating houses has been low. In fact they couldn’t
have afforded another blow for since the last six months
as the crime graph had gone high there had been a decline
in the numbers frequenting restaurants in the late hours.
Another fallout would definitely be on the cottage
industry — pickle and snack making industry. With
the rising graph of those unemployed, this we could least
afford. Checking up with small to medium rung restaurants
and grocery shops located even in posh market places
these fears have been confirmed — that there is a
general scare and a decline in the sales of these
products. I really don’t know how long this scare
would last for without food habits the presence of oil
cannot be sidelined, unless boiled food gets top
priority. And another controversy seems to be coming up — this time revolving around petrol. From August 31 the sale of leaded petrol would cease from all outlets situated in the Capital and it is only unleaded petrol that will be available. As rumours float that it would be unsuitable for cars fitted with catalytic converters the administration is doing little to come up with facts and naive motorists are queuing up to fill up tanks to the brim before the deadline. And before we move ahead, in all this chaotic state Delhi would remain less top-heavy in the coming days. On August 29 the PM leaves for Durban along with some of his cabinet members. And on September 6 the President and the First Lady leave for a fortnight-long tour to Portugal, Turkey, Luxembourg and the Union Ministers for Power and Industries would be accompanying him. Protima Bedi Those horrifying details of those perished in the landslides of the Garhwal Hills bring to the fore images of Protima Gauri Bedi. I had met her twice. The first time in 1991 around the time she was desperately determined to set up a dance school on the gurukal pattern. As we sat on the lawns of the IIC, after settling her mundu, she took on to talking obsessively about this school. Hurt that most of the business houses she’d approached had declined to give financial assistance to the project she kept repeating that come what may the school would definitely be set up. I was almost frightened by her determination, naively thinking that in case the project got aborted she would lose her head and maybe that voluptuous body too as she’d say “even if I have to starve for days I will see to it that it does come up...”. ‘Nrityagram’ did come up on the outskirts of Bangalore, though along with it controversies and talks of her close links with Ramakrishna Hedge (who was then all powerful in Bangalore). The second time I had met her was around the end of 1994 when she had come down here to do a dance programme for the Association of British Scholars (ABS) to raise funds for the further upkeep of ‘Nrityagram’ or as she had put it “I am begging all over, all the time-begging for Rs 100 nor Rs 1000.” And whoever had not contributed to that begging bowl were ripped apart by her in the choicest words and vocabulary and these included the top brass from the Culture Department “look at the way they are restricting arts to the urban elite...look at the crap going on in the name of tradition and culture... these people there are so...”. She had invited me to Nrityagram to see for myself how she was teaching 200 village children and the residential students but being an extremely reluctant traveller I never went down to see all that. And once again she surfaced last year, this time in my thoughts, when one heard that her son had committed suicide in the USA and soon after that as I sat dining in Uma Vasudev’s home Khushwant Singh told us that the caretaker of his cottage in Kasauli had telephoned him saying that Protima was there and wanted to stay in the cottage. Khushwant being Khushwant had, of course, given the go ahead and even commented that she has taken completely to the Himalayas and just roams in the region. Now that the hills have finally consumed her, rather served as the final rest to one of the boldest women of our times, at least no ironies standout. Tagore — from Romania I have just received from
our ambassador at Bucharest Rajiv Dogra, a book
“Tagore — Romania remembers” which is a
very recent compilation of interviews taken with
Rabindranath Tagore during November, 1926, when he had
undertaken a journey to Romania. Though it provides an
insight to his thoughts and philosophies but certain
passages to shock. I quote Tagore’s comments on
Mahatma Gandhi in an interview given to I. Valerian in
December, 1926. “Besides what you already know, I
have little to add. I cannot approve of extremist
principles. He says ‘let us boycott the rulers and
use violence in our fights. He wants to turn India into a
vast private weaving mill where each inhabitant may have
his own wheel to weave thread. I wonder how many
kilometres of thread we need to save India. He is a
highly cultivated person but his principles cannot do
good. There may be more than one million Indians in the
service of the rules. They may be thrown onto the streets
and they will starve there... our towns can be bombed in
only one night.’ |
 |
 |
| Nation
| Punjab | Haryana | Himachal Pradesh | Jammu & Kashmir | | Chandigarh | Business | Stocks | Sport | | Mailbag | Spotlight | World | 50 years of Independence | Weather | | Search | Subscribe | Archive | Suggestion | Home | E-mail | |
