|
|
Misdirected bandh
A good airport, at last! |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Justice Hegde relents
Dialogue with Pakistan
Maid of honour
Military Law Need to go beyond piecemeal changes
Administrative egotism and mischief must cease Corrections and clarifications
|
Misdirected bandh
A
hefty rise in the prices of essential commodities is a source of worry for all but a “Bharat bandh” is not the solution. It only adds to the woes of harried citizens, particularly the poor, whose cause the opposition parties supposedly champion. The RBI has done its bit to rein in inflation, but commodity prices now follow global trends. Food inflation will moderate if the monsoon proceeds as predicted. As for nailing hoarders, the opposition-ruled states’ performance is as unremarkable as that of states run by the Congress and other UPA partners. But price rise is not at the core of the protest, which has brought together parties as disparate ideologically as the BJP and the Left. They want to squeeze maximum political mileage out of public sentiment against the oil price rise. It is here that opposition hypocrisy stands out. It was the United Front government enjoying outside support of the Left parties which first notified the deregulation of petrol and diesel prices in 1997. But there was a change of government before the oil deregulation process could be completed. Then it was the BJP-led NDA government that freed up petrol and diesel prices in April 2002. It was an agenda hard to implement. How do these parties now justify their opposition to the UPA’s partial decontrol of oil prices? Experts across the economic spectrum have favoured oil price decontrol since the oil subsidy is a big drain on the exchequer. The latest backing comes from the Kirit Parikh committee, which has studied the issue in detail. The government petroleum marketing firms lose Rs 203 crore daily by selling oil below its imported cost. The UPA too could have continued with a populist approach, disregarding the conventional economic wisdom. But it has chosen to reform the system of oil pricing at the cost of losing support of misinformed sections of the public. Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee has ruled out a rollback of the oil price hike. It is commendable that the government has not succumbed to pressure.
|
|
A good airport, at last!
THE airport in the capital city presents the first glimpse of a country to a visitor. Let’s face it, the international airport of Delhi was a disgrace. Some compared it with the bus stand of a mofussil town. At long last, it has got a Rs 10,000-crore modern terminal which is the eighth largest in the world. The spanking marvel with 78 aerobridges and 168 check-in counters is a mandatory infrastructure which the country should have got a long time back. But it is never too late. The ninth largest aviation market in the world was languishing because the airport that it had had ranked a shocking 101 in terms of air service quality right up to 2007. The half-baked modernisation upgraded it to the 21st spot which was still a far cry from what was needed. The new terminal, which has come just in time for the forthcoming Commonwealth Games, would hopefully address numerous complaints about inordinate delays, baggage handing and even basic facilities. Much will depend on how well it is maintained in the days to come. The authorities must ensure that the services available at the airport are as good as at all other international airports. That will be possible only if public-private partnership that undertook the construction of the terminal, continues to function seamlessly in the operational matters also. But this is only the beginning. India needs many such airports, especially in cities like Mumbai and Kolkata. India is ideally situated to be a hub for travel to other countries in this part of Asia. But smaller countries like Malaysia and Singapore have stolen a march over us. We have not only to gain the lost ground but also to make sure that air travel within the country stops being an ordeal. It is time it was realised that flying from one place to another is no longer a luxury but a necessity. At the same time, it must be also ensured that the financial burden of constructing the new terminal is not passed on to the traveller too much in the form of taxes. |
|
|
Justice Hegde relents
Karnataka Lok Ayukta Justice Santosh Hegde’s decision to withdraw his resignation following appeals from BJP leader L.K. Advani and others is welcome. While resigning from his post on June 23, he had accused the B.S. Yeddyurappa government of being indifferent about corruption. The resignation caused great embarrassment for the BJP government which was celebrating its completion of two years in office. Justice Hegde, known for his crusade against corruption, was particularly disturbed over the disappearance of iron ore worth crores of rupees from Karwar and Belakeri ports. He took the government to task for having suspended Mr R. Gokul, an honest and upright Indian Forest Service officer, who is Karwar’s Deputy Conservator of Forests. On Justice Hegde’s directive, Mr Gokul had unearthed the illegal transportation of iron ore in February this year. However, as he refused to buckle under pressure from the mining lobby, he was suspended on a vague charge that he had failed to attend a minister’s meeting at Karwar. The Chief Minister has assured Justice Hegde that the government will support the Lok Ayukta in his fight against corruption. However, given the influence that the mining lobby seems to exercise over the state government, Mr Yeddyurappa’s assurance will be keenly watched in the days to come. On his part, Justice Hegde should avail himself of this opportunity to intensify his battle against corruption. He would be rendering a great social service if he brings to the limelight the transgressions of the government, if any, in this regard. To give a fillip to Justice Hegde’s anti-corruption movement, the state government should appoint an Upa Lok Ayukta expeditiously. More important, it needs to grant suo motu powers to the Lok Ayukta. If the State Assembly can alone grant this power, nothing prevents the government from convincing the House and pursuing the matter to its logical conclusion. Suo motu powers, if granted, will help the Lok Ayukta take up anonymous complaints against suspected officials, probe MPs and MLAs, initiate prosecution besides conducting raids on public servants after getting prior information about their disproportionate assets. Clearly, if the government is keen on checking corruption, it must empower the institution of Lok Ayukta in all respects. |
|
|
Flattery, like perfume, should be smelled, not swallowed. — American proverb
|
Dialogue with Pakistan
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s strategy of re-engagement with Pakistan is largely based on his belief that Pakistan under the circumstances may come around for a resolution of the long-pending and seemingly intractable issues. He has obviously realised that the US cannot be expected to go beyond a point in pushing Pakistan in the light of its own strategic compulsions in the region. However, the Prime Minister still managed to raise the issue with President Obama during the G-20 bilateral talks on the need to rein in Pakistan. Re-engagement in Dr Manmohan Singh’s mind, perhaps, remains the only option for any forward movement with Pakistan. Even at the cost of some dissension within the party, he went ahead and took the initiative as it came his way at Thimphu in May this year. The process began with the Foreign Secretary visiting Pakistan on June 23 for the first time after the 26/11 terrorist attacks, followed by the Home Minister visiting Islamabad on June 26. The External Affairs Minister will visit Pakistan on July 15 for comprehensive dialogue with his counterpart there. This reflected a fundamental shift in India’s stand for the last 18 months since 26/11 and rightly viewed by some with reservation and even deep pessimism. Obviously, the Prime Minister feels that the dialogue, notwithstanding the rancorous nature of mutual relations, is the only way to move forward and remove the so-called trust deficit. Each side feels that the other is not playing the game in all fairness and looks for alibis to bypass genuine engagement on perceived core issues. From India’s point of view, Pakistan has done little despite the promises to dismantle the terrorist training camps on their soil, stop infiltration of militants from across the LoC, rein in jihadi leaders and take adequate action against the perpetrators of the Mumbai attack. Pakistan’s proclivity to raise hitherto unknown issues now and then also adds to the rancour. On the other hand, Pakistan feels that India is not serious about resolving the Kashmir problem and views India’s continued interest in Afghanistan as inimical to its long-term security concerns. Despite these things, there are indications that Pakistan is willing to proceed forward in all seriousness. It may be mentioned here that the present Pakistan Army Chief, General Kyani, who was a close ally of General Musharraf and a party to all the major decisions taken by him during the Indo-Pak dialogue going on then, particularly in respect of Kashmir, may now be on board with his civilian government. The Pakistan Army and the ISI, which were invariably opposed to any rapprochement with India in the past, may have realised the futility of their policy, independent of their government’s line of thinking, now that the 18th constitutional amendment has been passed by their National Assembly. The Pakistan Prime Minister now stands significantly more empowered. Despite this, to what extent the army is on board will remain a doubtful proposition. However, no progress can be made in India-Pakistan relations, however much they may think out of the box or display cordiality or a facade of cohesion and cooperation as was evident during the current engagement. There is need for a change of the mindset on both sides. Pakistan has to overcome its passion for parity with India. The post-Independence generation now managing the affairs in Pakistan is not quite favourably disposed towards India. They have no such attachment as their forefathers had. Besides, there are hardliners on both sides who are ever ready to pull their governments down. With a democratic dispensation in one country and military primacy in the other, it is not easy for the governments to find quick solutions. Neither can afford to be seen giving space to the other on the so-called core issues. In spite of good intentions, they have to per force tread with great caution. The only way to go ahead is to set aside more intractable issues for the time being and concentrate on the less contentious ones that are more amenable to solution. India and China have been following this model despite the intractable nature of their border dispute. They are even cooperating diplomatically on major international issues. The more sensitive issues can best be handled first through back channel diplomacy and brought into public domain only when it is appropriate. However, the way the current engagement is taking place has given the impression that less contentious issues were taken up by the Foreign Secretaries, leaving aside more complex ones for the Home and Foreign Ministers to tackle later on. If that be so, this division of agenda has at least resulted in laying down the priorities. Pakistan, it seems, has now begun to feel that its intransigence towards India is proving counterproductive. The fact is that Pakistan has now realised the futility of the match with India in the light of the latter’s current politico- economic and military standing in the global milieu. The economic disparity between the two countries is also growing fast. India’s GDP is nearly 10 times higher than that of Pakistan. But for the US doles, the Pakistan economy would have collapsed long ago, considering the way it spends on its defence. Pakistan is one of the highest spenders on defence. It would have never become a challenge for India but for the US succour. Despite Pakistan’s intransigence and consequent impediments in India’s rise, it still stands way ahead of Pakistan if we look at all socio-economic indicators. Pakistan is almost at the lower end of the spectrum of human development index. Besides, the Pakistan Army, forced to fight its own people on the western border by the US since May last year, is in no position to manage a two-front war. It stands weakened with heavy casualties and low morale. “Pakistan needs to improve its relations with India so that it can focus on the situation along its western border with Afghanistan, where more troops have been deployed than any time in the past”, said Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi the other day. Does this then mean that Pakistan is looking for an interim relief in the current dialogue, and as far as the army is concerned, there is no change of the heart or the mindset? Was the bonhomie displayed by the Pakistan leadership recently a mere façade? Peace and war are the two sides of the same coin. To ensure peace, one has to have the means to win the war because that alone strengthens the negotiating position. If India could get Pakistan to stop state-sponsored cross-border terrorism, it would open the floodgates for enduring bonhomie between the two countries. The trust deficit will also narrow down then. The question is whether the Pakistan Army has also realised the need for the requisite change of the adversarial mindset. However, Dr Manmohan Singh has offered an opportunity to Pakistan to extricate itself from the decades of military adventurism and parity syndrome. It is for Pakistan now to use the opportunity in its own
interest.
The writer is a former Director-General, Defence Planning Staff.
|
||
Maid of honour
Her neat persona and dignified aura would not allow you to dismiss her as just another kaamwaali. So you end up addressing her as Mrs Peter. This mother of three grown up children can have a decent conversation on any subject under the sun. After all, one has to acquire a certain degree of sophistication if one has to live with a daughter, who was educated in Loreto Convent, Bangalore, and is now working for a prestigious company in the same city, and two sons working in BPOs in Delhi. Though only a matriculate, she is so self-respecting that she has tried to keep pace with the mental growth of her children and has achieved that. Well, almost. Mrs Peter wears a Cartier wristwatch about which she had no clue till someone educated her about the European brand and showed its mind-boggling price on the Internet. It has been dear to her all right, but for a reason remotely connected to either the price tag or the make of the watch. It was a gift from a person whom she had nursed to health when he was all alone in a foreign country. The watch was a validation of her dedicated service and she didn’t have the heart to say no. Besides, how much could a watch cost? With her knowledge limited to Titans and Fast Tracks, she could not imagine that a watch would cost more than Rs 5,000. And the Italian man, who was working in Delhi, looked as if he could afford to part with such a gadget! Now that she is aware of its true value, the watch brings a sense of responsibility. It’s not safe to leave such an expensive piece at home, in the custody of her husband with failing eyesight, nor is it done to wear it to her workplace, considering the kind of chores she has to do. Though she is only too happy to untie it from her wrist and show the prized possession to anyone who shows interest, the thought of keeping it protected is always weighing down her mind. Her carefree days are over. In fact, the watch has become the metaphor for the life she has always been leading – doing a job she loves, raising a family she is proud of, but living in the continuous fear of being exposed to her jealous relatives in Agra, who knows her an employee of some embassy. And when she admits her fear with an apologetic smile, I know it’s not easy being Mrs Peter. Despite all her achievements, her hard work, her self-respect, it needs a single blow to break her down. But nevertheless, if anyone wants to re-work the campaign ‘India Shining’, I cannot think of a better person than Mrs Peter to be the face of it. Only if someone would give her relatives a booster dose on ‘dignity of labour’ before they sign her up for the
purpose.
|
||
Military Law Need to go beyond piecemeal changes That military law in India is archaic and requires a serious rethink is a debate going on in military and legal circles for a long time – with little outcome. Apart from cosmetic changes and a few modifications, the basic framework has remained unchanged since inception. The law has its origins in the military law of England and its colonial character laying emphasis on the power of executive command rather than principles of natural justice continues. Statutory provisions were first made for the discipline of East India Company troops by an Act passed in 1754. The need for revision was felt after independence but the Army Act 1950 was largely a replication of the existing Indian Army Act 1911,conceived by the British by amending its earlier Articles of War and other military codes. Interestingly, the British have completely revamped their own system and they now have a compulsory review of its Service Discipline Acts every five years. Military justice in India is characterised by a system where the Army Act is the guiding instrument for laying down rules and regulations governing military personnel. Offences attracting penal action can be dealt with administratively, as in departmental action in civilian set-up or be tried by a court martial, which is akin to a criminal trial by a sessions court. The Tribunal observed that the four-tier process from preliminary inquiry through hearing of charge and summary of evidence to the actual trial, was cumbersome, time consuming and totally unwarranted. Therefore this exercise be shortened like a criminal trial to expedite court martial proceedings. The bench also held that elementary mistakes were committed in conduct of military trials due to lack of training of court officials. Courts martial, the bed-rock for enforcing discipline, are ad-hoc courts comprising of officers picked at random to hear a single case. Court members and the prosecutor, are not law qualified and are advised legal procedures by a judge advocate, the only legally qualified person on the bench. The Tribunal recommended that a court martial’s presiding officer be a legally trained person who can regulate its proceedings and such presiding officers, prosecutors and judge-advocates should be sent for training to criminal courts where regular trials are conducted. It in 1982 that the Supreme Court had pointed out serious anomalies in the military law. Using the words “archaic” and “antiquated” to describe it, the apex court had called for an overhaul of the system and had also strongly advocated setting up a separate tribunal to adjudicate appeals in military cases. Except for a few changes in the Army Act, overhauling the system was relegated to the back burner. At the inauguration of the Army Institute of Law in 2003, then President Dr A.P.J. Abdul Kalam had, in the light of a number of decisions taken by courts martial being revised by High Courts, stressed for making a systematic study of the military judicial system and appropriately modifying service Acts. As military law is meant for enforcing discipline, he opined that soldiers had gradually become knowledge workers with growth in education levels and technological progress, and the management of knowledge workers was different from the conventional system of managing soldiers. An educated, well-informed individual would be more aware of his rights or acts perceived to be disadvantageous to him than the brawny soldier of yore. The society, of which soldiers form an integral part, has witnessed drastic changes in its socio-economic and cultural profile, leading to shifs in their perception of life, desires, family demands and social obligations. These have a direct correlation with service careers and related competition. Military law in India has not kept pace with transformation in a dynamic society. Till recently over 10,000 cases pertaining to court martial appeals, promotions, postings and allied service matters were pending in High Courts. This is a reflection on the system. The AFT, to which these are being transferred, would no doubt help in speedier disposal of these matters, but except for relieving pressure on the high courts, its establishment after hanging fire for over 25 years, does not go into the root of the problem. Unless fundamental changes are brought about to make military law more effective and amiable to today’s environment, of course without compromising professional standards and discipline, dissatisfaction and litigation will continue and probably increase. The defence minister recently announced a common law being conceived for the three Services, which are governed by different Army, Navy and Air Force Acts. It is now, while forming the new Act that the government should take a deliberate and holistic approach and give a serious thought to the maladies affecting the Indian military law and bringing appropriate changes. There is also a need to go in for wider debate on the issue, involving members of the judiciary, bar, the service community and academia. . One issue that needs serious consideration is separating the Judge Advocate General’s branch at various levels from the command hierarchy and making it an independent entity to prevent being influenced by commanders, as the JAG officers, the court and the accused report to the same overall commander. Summary Court Martial, a feature unique to the Army where a unit’s commanding officer solely constitutes the court with powers to dismiss or imprison an individual, has also been an issue of considerable debate and there have calls to make this mechanism more transparent with greater checks and balances.
The shortcomings How to remove them
n Pre-trial procedures be shortened. Repetitive steps like court of inquiry, hearing of charge and summary of evidence be rationalised.
n
Revision of findings and sentences by the convening authority as well as pre and post confirmation petitions be dispensed with. n
Introduction of provision of bail for persons placed under close arrest during pre-trial and trial period. n
Summary court martial is viewed as the most abused tool of power by the commanding officer where an accused does not have right to a counsel. There have been calls to introduce eater checks and balances.
|
|
Administrative egotism and mischief must cease THE new National Litigation Policy has special significance for the defence services, particularly disabled veterans. The policy ordains that frivolous appeals would not be filed by government departments and that appeals on orders of Tribunals shall be an exception rather than the rule. Further, false and misleading pleas or technicalities shall not be espoused. For long veterans have been at the receiving end of paper violence perpetrated by the government’s legal pundits, who, guided by a strange spirit of sadism, exhaust every single game in the book to ensure benefits do not reach the beneficiaries even when directed by higher judiciary. To begin with, medical authorities indulge in “literal” rather than “liberal’ interpretation of rules, thereby denying benefits to disabled soldiers. They forget the “spirit” while clinging to the “letter”. When there is a court order granting disability pension, appeals and reviews are filed as a matter of routine even in cases fully covered by earlier judicial rulings. It is not the higher echelons of governance or the services headquarters that are to blame, but the swarm of section officers, under secretaries and deputy secretaries who rule the roost. The lower-level bureaucracy with its caustic file-notings, unfortunately, runs the government. That the new policy specially mentions “false” and “misleading” pleas shows the powers that be are aware of the malaise. Appeals are filed not out of legal necessity but because of administrative egotism – How could a petty employee win a case against the mighty officialdom? Then comes the stage where dubious pleas are presented before the courts, which if not rebutted by a well acquainted legal brain, end in pronouncements which can hardly be termed well-rounded. This reminds me of some cases with special reference to disabled soldiers. In Secretary MoD Vs Ajit Singh, the defence ministry is on record, stating that disability pension was not released to him since he did not have the minimum required service of 10 years. In reality, there is no minimum service requirement for disability pension and even a recruit is entitled to the same. In the recent case of Karan Singh Vs UOI, the government espoused that the Army alone provides disability pension to its employees. The truth is that civilian employees are also entitled to exactly the same benefits. In P.K. Kapur Vs UoI the government went hammer and tongs proclaiming it had the right to fix a cut-off date for grant of certain disability benefits that had been refused to pre-1996 retirees. The case went in favour of the government since the Court was never informed that the said benefits through the same master notification had already been extended to similarly placed pre-1996 civilian retirees. The petitioner could not rebut the falsehood since he could not afford a lawyer. It is not that mischievous elements are playing around only with the judiciary. The higher strata of governance is also not left untouched. In a speech last month, apparently prepared by a similarly inclined officer, the Defence Minster was made to “announce” with pride that the government had introduced an additional amount of Rs 3,000 as constant attendance allowance for disabled soldiers keeping in view their sacrifices. So far so good, but the humble Minister was not in the knowledge that firstly, this allowance is applicable to civilian employees too and hence has nothing to do with valour or sacrifices. Second, the concept is in force since times immemorial and even its enhancement is old news which was announced in March 2008 by the Sixth Pay Commission. Third, it is not applicable to all disabled personnel but only to 100 per cent disabled retirees. In the past two years there have been other instances where the political executive and the top brass have been misled into announcing beneficial “policy decisions” by hiding from them the fact that the same had actually been necessitated due to Supreme Court decisions.
(Maj Navdeep Singh is a lawyer practicing in the Punjab and Haryana High Court) |
|
— Brig (Dr) S.D. Dutta (Retd),
— Col R. Balasubramanian (Retd).
— Col S.K. Aggarwal (Retd),
— Rajeev Anand,
— Arvind Moudgil,
— Capt Sandeep Bansal,
|
|
|
Corrections and clarifications
n
In the breakquote of the news-item headlined “Initial parleys between the PGI Director and members of the association have paid” (Page 3, July 5) should have been “paid off.” n
The headline “Bus runs over elderly at ISBT-17,” (Page 2, July 5, Chandigarh Tribune), is incorrect. n
On Page 1 of Lifestyle, (July 5), in the article, “Checkmate,” it is stated that “Virender Sehwag will tie the nuptial knot on April 22..” Sehwag had got married in May 2009, so the information sourced from the Internet should have been edited. n
The headline “Plea to act against illegal abbatoir” (Page 3, July 4, The Tribune) should have been “Plea for action…” Despite our earnest endeavour to keep The Tribune error-free, some errors do creep in at times. We are always eager to correct them. This column appears twice a week — every Tuesday and Friday. We request our readers to write or e-mail to us whenever they find any error. Readers in such cases can write to Mr Kamlendra Kanwar, Senior Associate Editor, The Tribune, Chandigarh, with the word “Corrections” on the envelope. His e-mail ID is kanwar@tribunemail.com. Raj Chengappa,
|
|
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
T
T
L
WHEN the Army Act 1950 was introduced, it was just old wine in a new bottle and since then we have paid lip service to changes required in military law. Even with the Tribunal coming up, a large number of service personnel cannot approach it because the it lacks jurisdiction in several areas like transfers and in certain cases of summary courts martial. Also with the Tribunal now functional, several provisions in the Army Act pertaining to court martial like review of sentences by high authorities or pre and post confirmations petitions need to be done away with.
I
M
WE must apply the basic concepts of justice and humar rights to the armed forces, while maintaining discipline and operational efficiency. Many countries have amended their military laws regarding the rights of the accused and the human rights standards. We have also made a beginning by setting up Armed Forces Tribunal at various places across the country.