 |
Monday,
May 21, 2001, Chandigarh, India  
|
Kashmir
agenda Labour of mistrust |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Question
of India’s food security Role of
“third eye” in exposing the corrupt
Obesity
too causes cancer
Jayalalitha
as CM: undesirable but not unconstitutional
|
|
Kashmir agenda A motivated section has sought to create the impression that a clueless Centre is meandering into yet another extension of the "ceasefire" in Jammu and Kashmir only because it has no alternative. This hypothesis ignores a vital point: the nomination of Planning Commission Deputy Chairman K.C. Pant as the chief negotiator last month. Obviously, he has not been put in the hot seat only to be left high and dry at this stage by calling a halt to the unilateral declaration of cessation of hostilities announced on November 28 on the first day of the holy month of Ramzan and extended several times since then. Taking into account Mr Pant's cautious eye for detail, it can be safely premised that he accepted the appointment only after being fully convinced that he will have the full backing of the Central Government in holding negotiations. Apparently, it was clear to Mr Pant as well as the government that the Kashmir knot was not going to be untangled in a matter of days. As such, any extension of the ceasefire is not going to be an isolated affair, but an integral part of a larger plan. This impression is further strengthened by the deliberations at a high-level meeting at the Unified Command headquarters in Srinagar on Saturday. If Home Minister L.K. Advani had any misgivings about the advisability of the ceasefire exercise, he did not show these at all. In fact, he appeared to be a thorough convert, saying that the overall feedback was positive, though some negative remarks were also there. These "negative remarks" have been generated thanks to the escalation of violence in the valley after the ceasefire. It is also true that the militants' response is not what the Centre would have liked, but to call the cessation of hostilities an exercise in futility will be a misnomer. Similarly, J&K Democratic Freedom Party (DFP) chairman Shabir Shah may not be the ideal man to hold negotiations with, but a beginning has been made, howsoever small. Three developments are worthy of note in this regard. One, the Army has supported the extension of the ceasefire, although the Sangh Parivar and even the state government do have serious reservations. Two, former President of Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK) Sardar Abdul Qayoum Khan and several other leaders have reportedly backed Shabir Shah's response. Three, world opinion is fully in favour of ceasefire. Pakistan on its part will be too happy to see the peace process being derailed. It has unleashed all the violence mainly to discredit the government's initiative within India. We cannot afford to fall in its trap. At the same time, what needs to be ensured is that the well-meaning reprieve is not used by the enemies of the nation to strengthen themselves and to further their vicious designs. |
|
Labour of mistrust IT is now out in the open, the growing bitterness between the BJP-led NDA government and the RSS-affiliated Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh. It was on full view on the first day of the two-day Indian Labour Conference on Friday. BMS secretary-general Hasmukhbhai Dave fired several volleys of criticism from a pointblank range and Prime Minister Vajpayee refused to recognise his physical presence, although he rebutted his arguments. The spat was inevitable. The immediate provocation is the government decision to permit 26 per cent foreign investment in defence production of all types. The BMS claims majority support in all ordnance factories and fears that the entry of foreign firms would lead to a lower demand and unemployment. Being an RSS outfit, it would not say so. It gives its objection an ultra nationalistic veneer, saying that handing over such a sensitive sector to outsiders is to compromise on national security. A day earlier Mr Dave went a step further and dubbed the NDA government “anti-national” mainly on this score. To make the BMS objection substantial, he also brings in what he calls the ill-effects of economic reforms like increasing poverty, slower industrial production and closure of small-scale units. Although less harsh than the BMS, all other central trade unions are up in arms over the Centre’s attempt to amend the Industrial Disputes Act and the Indian Labour Contract Act. The first will take away some rights the labour force enjoys now and the second will allow employers to have 10 times more contract labourers than now. Mr Vajpayee was hurt at the poisoned remarks of Mr Dave and showed it by his action. He kept aside his prepared speech and went into an impromptu exercise. He quoted National Sample Survey findings to claim that poverty is shrinking, forgetting that several economists have challenged the result. Every request for investment in defence production is to be closely vetted and hence the fear of a threat to national security is paranoia. There is no freezing the economic reforms and pulling out of the WTO. India should not withdraw into a shell, not in the present-day world of rapid changes. All old statements uttered with verve but without conviction. But the point is that a strong impression has surfaced that the government is insensitive to the plight of the common man and the poor. Starting with an increase in the prices of foodgrains sold through fair price shops, the government has slashed interest rate on small savings and provident fund. Public sector units are being sold, or rather prepared for early closure, without taking care of the workforce. Where disinvestment has gone on smoothly, there has been lack of transparency. The point is that the government does not consult the affected parties and gives the impression that it acts first and thinks later. There is obviously need for globalisation of policy formulation also. The government cannot antagonise the labour, not at this moment. |
|
Question
of India’s food security FOOD is the basic necessity of life, the shortage of which can have serious socio-economic and political repercussions on the country. India, being the second largest country in the world in terms of population, has to review food security in the light of any change in the world economic system. The emergence of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995 is believed to have deep implications in this regard. Therefore, this paper was attempted to review the existing status of food supply and demand in the country and the impact of changes in the world economic order on food security, and to suggest possible corrective policy measures. India at the time of its Independence was engulfed in serious food shortages. During the mid-sixties the Green Revolution made a spectacular increase in food production, particularly in the case of wheat and rice. The production of wheat increased from 11 million tonnes in 1960-61 to 75.6 million tonnes in 1999 and that of rice from 34.6 million tonnes to 89.5 million tonnes during this period. The compound growth rate (CGR) in foodgrains production during the past half a century was 2.5 per cent while population increased at 2.2 per cent. This helped to ease the situation of food availability. The country was annually importing on an average 3.5 million tonnes of foodgrains till the sixties but it has now become one of the major exporters of cereals. The per capita availability of cereals increased from 408.7 g/cap/day in 1961 to 470.4 g/cap/day in 2000. But the availability of pulses declined at a faster rate. On the other hand, the production of more nutritive food like milk, fish, eggs, meat, fruits and vegetables went up substantially. But the fast growth of population resulted in a slow growth of per capita availability of such food items. Moreover, earlier the poor had better access to proteinous food like pulses and are now deprived of it. The general economic growth, measured by per capita NNP at constant prices during this period, registered an almost 2.5 times increase but the absolute size of population below the poverty line with poor accessibility to food did not show a significant decline, in spite of the decrease in the percentage of those below the poverty line. In the context of the subject, it is not enough to highlight the production and availability of foodgrains as well as the economic growth based on the per capita real income. It is equally, if not more, important to correlate food security with income distribution. The incidence of poverty as an important indicator of income inequality reveals that the percentage of population below the poverty line has gone down from 54.3 in 1973-74 to 44.5 in 1983-84, to 36 in 1993-94 and 26.1 in 1999-2000. But due to a fast increase in population the absolute number of persons below the poverty line still continues to be around 300 million in the country. This is an indication that a big chunk of population does not have access to the required food due to the lack of purchasing power. In order to keep the social pot cool, the PDS of foodgrains was adopted which cost the state exchequer heavily. The intervention of the government in the foodgrain market in 1967 by way of providing price support to farmers was a desirable step, but for which the price of foodgrains would have crashed in the wake of the Green Revolution. This was done through a procurement and public distribution system. In the process, an effective and remunerative price support to producers and cheap food to consumers resulted in food subsidy, which increased from Rs 2,850 crore in 1991-92 to Rs 60.7 billion in 1996-97. The differentiated price policy for people below and above the poverty line (BPL and APL) since 1997-98 further widened the gap between the economic cost and the sale realisation of wheat and rice, raising the food subsidy to a record level of Rs 9200 crore in 1999-2000. The food subsidy thus accounts for about 4 per cent of the nation’s fiscal expenditure. In the food delivery system, it is important to mention that the Food Corporation of India being the sole government agency dealing with it, inefficiencies have crept into the system which necessitates the entry of private trade to create a competitive spirit. Moreover, price differentiation for APL and BPL families results in pilferage with the poor still devoid of access to food. This calls for measures and programmes to improve their purchasing power by creating employment opportunities, food-for-work and strengthening consumers’ cooperatives. There is enough evidence to support the fact that the marginal (over one hectare area) and small farmers (1-2 hectare land) have negligible marketable surplus. The number of such subsistence farms are increasing at an alarming rate. In 1985-86, marginal farmers accounted for 57.8 per cent of the cultivators which increased to 59.4 per cent in 1990-91. Their number increased by 12.9 per cent within five years. Similar was the case with small farmers. On the other hand, farmers with more than four hectares of land are dwindling down drastically. If the number of small and marginal farmers continues to swell at the same rate, it can create a food security problem with serious dimensions. In spite of all the efforts to increase the demand, foodgrain production has been rising still faster. The stocks are piling up over and above the minimum requirement. The surplus exportable grains were expected to turn into gold with the emergence of the WTO. But the situation has turned the other way round with the foodgrain prices in the world market consistently falling over time. The domestic support prices, having been based on the cost of production and parity with non-farm product prices, are rising leaving no margin for exporters. Moreover, the high cost of maintaining the undisposable stock of foodgrains has created a doubt in the minds of farmers regarding the continuation of price support. Thus the surpluses have rather put the farm economy into the reverse gear, calling for an urgent need to reshape the price policy and long-term export-import policy for farm products in general. The emergence of the WTO in 1995 provided a ray of hope for the surplus economies to have a better market access, and benefit from the expected increase in international prices. The provisions of the Agreement on Agriculture under the WTO were basically targeted on three issues: market access, domestic support and reduction of export subsidies. The lowering of tariff barriers in terms of import duties, removal of quantitative restrictions and sanitary and phyto-sanitary measures much more by the developed world was supposed to provide better market access to the developing countries. The domestic support to agriculture (product specific and non-product specific support) was also to be reduced by the developed countries much faster than the developing nations. This was expected to result in a more competitive edge to the developing countries. However, blue box and green box exemptions have provided a lot of escapism to the developed economies. The gigantic export subsidies on agricultural products provided by some economies, if lowered as per provisions of the WTO may lead to more market opportunities for agricultural products of other countries. But the outcome of all these measures, instead of raising the price in the world market, has resulted in a fall in the foodgrains prices, making it further difficult to find the potential market. The gap between the world market price and the domestic prices of rice and wheat is narrowing down, leaving less and less margin for export. The global prices being highly volatile and the domestic prices rising steadily make it further difficult to follow a long-term stable export policy. The growth in the economy on all fronts, including food production, gets subsided due to the parallel growth of population. Therefore, it is of vital importance that the issue of population control be given top priority. The growth of food production at the cost of natural resources such as water, soil and climate cannot be substained beyond a certain limit. Thus the production pattern also calls for a drastic change in Indian agriculture. The states such as Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh, after exploiting the production potential of rice and wheat, are now facing ecological degradation, such areas should be made to diversify their production towards export-oriented products such as fruits, vegetables, dairy products, poultry and spices. For this purpose, there is need for developing suitable infrastructure for the export purposes and providing world class processing facilities. There is also need for developing a global market network. On the other hand, the deficit states having a high potential should be encouraged in foodgrains production. This is possible through drastic changes in the price policy and large public and private investments in this sector. To improve the efficiency of the food delivery system, private trade in foodgrains should be encouraged. Mr Joginder Singh is Professor and Head, Department of Economics and Sociology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. Mrs Veena Goel is Economist (Marketing) in the same department. |
|
Role of “third eye” in exposing the corrupt THE recent Tehelka expose dramatically brought into sharp focus the problem of corruption in high places. It sent shock waves throughout the country. Parliament was greatly exercised over the episode and normal work came to a grinding halt. The whole world was watching whether we were capable of tackling the issues with maturity and safeguarding our image. Our country had entered a dangerous phase a few years ago when people had started accepting corruption as an inevitable part of life. The rampant corruption, affecting the day-to-day life of an ordinary citizen, has, of late, assumed colossal proportions. A stage has been reached where the corrupt go about their business in a brazen manner. The tariff for each approval or sanction or the follow-up action after such approval or sanction is almost publicly announced. The tariff naturally gets revised upwards periodically. People are not outraged anymore by this wanton extortion as they realise that they simply cannot survive if they do not accept the terms set for their legitimate entitlements. The story is even more bizarre when it comes to seeking favours which require bending or breaking a rule. Unfortunately, there are people who want such favours and they are prepared to cooperate to any extent. Be it telephone connection or repair, allotment of land or apartment, electricity, sewerage or water connections, registration of a complaint in a police station or any such essential requirement, harassment by the functionaries at the cutting edge of the administration has reached unbelievable limits. These functionaries openly say that the loot is shared upto the top of the hierarchy. There is no means of verifying this. But one thing is certain. If for such jobs you approach the higher officials and complain, the matter gets more complicated and the game is so cleverly played that you are driven back to the operational level to meekly surrender and pay up. There is no fear of the CBI, the CVC or the Income Tax Department as the corrupt very well know that these watchdog institutions seldom are able to take the cases to their logical conclusion. Even if a few get punished ultimately it amounts to an insignificantly tiny percentage of the whole lot of corrupt officials in the business of moneymaking. For the ordinary citizen corruption in high places is a distant phenomenon. He does not realise that the virus travels down the line reaching his doorstep. He becomes a helpless victim of this vicious disease and starts paying bribes for everything. Yet he does not know what to do with his political masters whom he voted to power and who are corrupt. Politicians who have indulged in corrupt practices have gone scot-free. Since Independence no politician has ever been jailed for accepting bribes and amassing wealth. One often wonders if there is an understanding among the politicians belonging to different political parties that when one is in the opposition one will make just the necessary noises about the corrupt practices of ministers and await his turn to come to power to carry on the loot. One has heard that some Chief Ministers make sure that the opposition leader is also paid, though a smaller sum, for each transaction. It is often said that corruption is a global phenomenon and, therefore, we should not bother about it too much. This is just sanctimonious humbug. There may be payoffs at the top levels even in some developed countries. But no leader can dare compromise national interest and get away with it. More than that, the ordinary citizen is not engulfed in an environment of corruption as in our country. I have heard prospective foreign investors say why in India there is so single window system of delivering the money and getting the job done. They say that in some countries where dictators rule, such a system prevails and there is no hassle whatsoever in completing and commissioning the projects, as the entire hierarchy cooperates without further inducements. They say that we seem to be practising democratic decentralisation with a vengeance! These days there is a lot of talk of the so-called hidden agenda of political parties. It is now obvious that all political parties do have a hidden agenda. They say so many things in their manifesto, but corruption is the hidden agenda which does not find mention. Where do we go from here? The “third eye” is the answer. It is the people who constitute this “third eye”. They should go all out to expose the corrupt. We are just witnessing a beginning of this grand awakening. No one has any moral right to say that the methods employed to catch the thieves red-handed are unethical. Desperate situations require desperate remedies. It is believed that Lord Siva opens his Third Eye to burn and annihilate the evil-doers. Let the people make that happen to the custodians of democracy who betray their trust. The writer is a retired IAS officer and former Secretary to the President of India. |
|
Obesity too causes cancer OBESITY
is the single biggest known cancer among non-smokers, research has found — although the precise link remains unclear. The discovery emerged from a wide-ranging study of cancer death in the US, which also showed many of the world’s six million annual cancer deaths could be avoided if people lost weight and gave up smoking. Surprisingly and despite the continuing publicity over such alleged causes of cancer such as overhead power lines, mobile phones, radioactivity and environmental contaminants, “no known mutagen has ever been shown to cause appreciable number of cancers, once other causes are taken out”, said Professor Julian Peto, of the Institute of Cancer Research, who carried out the analysis published today in the journal Nature. Tobacco is the biggest single cause of cancer and accounts for more than half of all cancer deaths in smokers. In non-smokers, 10 per cent of cancer deaths in the US — and 7 per cent in Europe, where obesity is less prevalent — could be attributed to being overweight. Other causes also figure strongly as some cancers are clearly triggered by infections. Cervical cancer is directly linked to infection with the human papilloma virus; stomach cancers have been linked to the bacterium Helicobacter pylori, which also causes ulcers. Alcohol, excess sunlight and air pollution each contribute to about 1 per cent of avoidable causes. Professor Peto said the finding that weight has such an impact was surprising. “But another thing that is surprising is that it’s not clear what you can do if you are too fat already.” A wide-ranging population study was needed to provide answers, he said.
The Observer Tarun Gogoi a caring husband: wife Tarun Gogoi may be Assam’s new Chief Minister, but for wife Dolly he is a “caring husband” with all the ingredients of a “family man.” For Dolly, a housewife now, life remains the same — be it in power or without it. “Nothing new to me. Being the Chief Minister’s wife does not bring in any change to my daily life and to me it is just like any other day,” Dolly told IANS. Ever since their marriage in 1972, Dolly was a source of inspiration for the 65-year-old Tarun Gogoi. “He is a seasoned politician and I am sure he would be able to provide good governance,” said Dolly, who had earlier run a school in New Delhi. Dolly, unlike Jayashree Goswami Mahanta, wife of former Chief Minister Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, does not have any political ambitions as such — rather she prefers to maintain a low profile doing household chores and grooming her two children. It was often said of Jayashree that she was politically over ambitious. Gogoi’s son Gaurav, a college student in New Delhi is, however, in a spot — to join or not to join politics. “Maybe, I don’t know. Half of my family say go for it (politics), while half of them say go and do something else,” Gaurav said. “I am interested in politics no doubt and I feel proud of my father and expect him to successfully complete his full five-year term.”
IANS Single & still a good dad The number of single men raising children increased dramatically in the past decade as American families and courts grew more willing to accept the idea that sometimes the best place for kids is with Dad. According to the 2000 census, of the country’s total 105.5 million households, 2 per cent, or 2.2 million, comprised fathers raising children without a mother living there. It also found that the number of single-father households rose 62 per cent in 10 years. Single fathers say the numbers help undermine a long-standing perception that single dads tend to abandon their kids or at least not take care of them as well as single moms, said Vince Regan, an Internet consultant from Michigan, raising five kids on his own. “In time, it goes a long way in helping society think that single fathers do help their kids and want to be part of their lives,” he said. Thomas Coleman, Executive Director of the American Association for Single People, attributed the rise in single dads to a variety of reasons that include more judges’ readiness to award custody to fathers in divorce cases and more women’s decisions to choose jobs over family life.
AP |
|
Jayalalitha
as CM: undesirable but not unconstitutional IN one of the most stunning examples in recent history of the vibrancy of Indian democracy, a democracy that celebrates its presence at the polls as dramatically as it lies dormant during the interregnum between one poll and another, AIADMK supremo Jayalalitha confounded all her critics last week as she romped home with 197 of the 234 Assembly seats in Tamil Nadu and became — courtesy former Supreme Court judge and Governor Fathima Beevi — the first convict in free India to be sworn in as the Chief Minister of a State. “Jayalalitha takes oath, with conviction” read The HindustanTimes next morning on May 15, a headline that would be hard to surpass for the telling subtlety with which it employs the English language. Reports say, said the paper, that the Governor moved quickly since she was keen to avoid a constitutional crisis and because Jayalalitha herself wanted to pre-empt a possible legal challenge. Never more than mediocre as a judge, Fathima Beevi is said to have consulted Attorney General Soli Sorabjee and the doyen of the Supreme Court Bar, Fali Nariman, then in Chennai, before deciding to invite Jayalalitha to take over as Chief Minister. “She (Fathima Beevi) is a former Supreme Court judge. She herself is a legal expert. None need to teach her about law or the Constitution. Her decision is not justiciable,” Jayalalitha told reporters two days later on May 16, returning the compliment (or the gesture). She foresaw no problem, she added, in getting herself elected to the Assembly within six months as required under the Constitution. And said she was exploring legal possibilities to overcome the problem created by her disqualification — or rejection of her nomination papers on the ground that she stood disqualified owing to her conviction — by the Returning Officers of four constituencies at the commencement of the poll process. That is easier said than done. Judges may continue to fret and fume at accusations over the law’s delays but the pace of disposal of criminal appeals in most High Courts around the country is indefensibly slow. And Jayalalitha’s continuance as Chief Minister beyond six months depends entirely on whether her appeals against conviction in the two TANSI (Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation) cases are heard and disposed of by the High Court at Chennai within that period. The debate that the rejection of her nomination papers earlier and her being sworn in as Chief Minister now, regardless of such rejection, have spawned is not inconsiderable but it is surprising, indeed, that it has struck no one that the controversy would not have arisen at all had her appeals against conviction been heard and disposed of when they were filed late last year. Is it too much to expect of India’s superior judiciary that it take a little time off from the sermonising that it so freely indulges in to attend to that part of its traditional jurisdiction that underlies the preservation of law and order in any civilised society — the dispensation of criminal justice? If Jayalalitha’s appeals are allowed and her conviction set aside, the problem of disqualification would simply cease to be. And if, conversely, her conviction is upheld in appeal, she must, without further ado, exit as Chief Minister. But, pray, is not the entire debate somewhat misdirected if the judiciary, having once convicted her, can find no time to take up her appeal or looks askance at anyone, like yours truly, who dares to draw attention to the fact? But it would be churlish of me to stop at that and not deal per se with the issue thrown up by the debate:: the legality of Jayalalitha’s appointment as Chief Minister. Denouncing the appointment as a dangerous precedent, senior Supreme Court lawyer and academic Rajeev Dhavan unfolded its implications thus in The Hindu on May 18: “It will affect future Cabinet formations at all levels. From now on, Chief Ministers — as, indeed, Prime Ministers — will not be hesitant to induct convicted criminals into the Cabinet. An entire tradition of democracy has been thrown out of a Raj Bhavan’s window. In the past, Ministers convicted of a crime were made to resign. After Ms Fathima Beevi’s decision, they will march into office unabashed and unashamed.” In a shorter but even better argued piece that would do credit to the ablest of lawyers, assistant editor Manoj Mitta wrote in The Indian Express on May 17: “It is one thing to say that a person can become a minister without being a legislator. But it is an entirely different thing to make this leap in logic: that a person can be made a minister even if he is disqualified for being a legislator.” Noticing the difference between the constitutional provisions relating to qualifications and disqualifications for the President, the Vice-President and MPs and MLAs, on the one hand, and the Prime Minister, chief minister and ministers, on the other — no person is eligible to be President or Vice-President, for instance, unless he is “qualified for election as a member” of the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha — Mitta believes that no express provision exists in respect of the latter because the founding fathers presumed that a person who is not eligible to be a legislator cannot be appointed as Prime Minister, chief minister or minister. Mitta then refers to Ambedkar’s oft-quoted speech in the Constituent Assembly while defending the provision that permits a non-legislator to be appointed a Minister for six months. “(I)t is perfectly possible to imagine,” said Ambedkar on December 31, 1948, “that a person who is otherwise competent to hold the post of a Minister has been defeated in a constituency for some reason which, although it may be perfectly good, might have annoyed the constituency......” Such a person, he said, can well be appointed a member of the Cabinet on the assumption that he shall get himself elected from that, or any other, constituency within six months. There is no justification, Mitta observes, for Governor Fathima Beevi to lose sight of the fact that Jayalalitha is not “otherwise competent” to hold the post of Minister. The term “competent”, he adds, as used by Ambedkar refers not to the person’s administrative ability but to his eligibility in the light of the constitutional criteria (for legislators). But both Mitta and Dhavan, and others who have written on the subject, have overlooked a vital legislative development in the Constituent Assembly the day Ambedkar made this speech. As well as a day earlier. The rejection by the Assembly of Prof K.T. Shah’s amendments to draft Articles 61 and 62, proposing that no one be (allowed to be) appointed as a Minister if he has been convicted of an offence. Or certain offences, to be more precise. The relevant part of Prof Shah’s amendment No 1300 to Article 61, moved, debated and put to vote on December 30, 1948, read as follows: “No one shall be appointed Minister or Deputy Minister or Parliamentary Secretary who has been convicted of treason, or of any offence against the sovereignty, security or integrity of the State, or of any offence involving moral turpitude and of bribery and corruption and liable to a maximum punishment of two years rigorous punishment.” The relevant part of Prof Shah’s amendment No 1336 to Article 62 — or, more properly, his proposal for the addition of a new Article 62-A after Article 62 — moved, debated and put to vote the next day on December 31, read as follows: “No one shall be elected or appointed to any public office including that of the President, Governor, Minister of the Union or of any State of the Union, Judge of the Supreme Court or of any High Court in any State in the Union, who...(c) has been found guilty at any time before such election or appointment of any offence against the safety, security or integrity of the Union; or (d) of any offence involving moral turpitude and making him liable on conviction to a maximum punishment of two years imprisonment...” The first amendment was rejected by the Constituent Assembly even as draft Article 61 (present Article 74) was adopted by it. And the second amendment, or proposal, was rejected even as draft Article 62 (present Article 75) was adopted. Article 74 deals with the “Council of Ministers to aid and advise (the) President” while Article 75 lays down “other provisions as to Ministers”, including the provision for appointment of a non-legislator as a Minister for six months. Article 163 and 164 are the corresponding provisions for appointment of the Council of Ministers/Ministers in a State. The author of the amendments, Prof K.T. Shah, was no ordinary member of the Constituent Assembly. One of the eight members of the Congress Experts Committee on the Constituent Assembly, set up in July, 1946, and chaired by Jawahar Lal Nehru, Shah was an untiring participant in the onerous task of the framing of India’s Constitution. A graduate of the London School of Economics and a former member of Gray’s Inn, his proposals always evoked serious and lively debate. Thus even while he turned down Shah’s amendment on December 30, 1948, in a lengthy speech, Ambedkar observed: “His last proposition is that no person who is convicted may be appointed a Minister of the State. Well, so far as his intention is concerned, it is no doubt very laudable and I do not think that any member of this House would like to differ from him on that proposition.” But, said Ambedkar, the “whole question is this: whether we should introduce all these qualifications and disqualifications in the Constitution itself.” “Is it not desirable (he asked), is it not sufficient that we should trust the Prime Minister, the legislature and the public at large watching the action of the Ministers and the actions of the legislature to see that no such infamous thing is done by either of them?” “I think (he concluded) this is a case which may eminently be left to the good sense of the Prime Minister and to the good sense of the legislature, with the general public holding a watching brief upon them. I therefore say that these amendments are unnecessary.” Lest the last word “unnecessary” used by Ambedkar create any doubt, one will have to turn back a couple of pages of the Constituent Assembly debates to find Ambedkar opening his speech with an express refusal to accept any of the amendments tabled on the point of appointment of Ministers, including Shah’s amendment. Read properly and as a whole, and coupled with the rejection of Prof Shah’s proposals, it is evident that while Ambedkar did not consider it desirable for a convict to become a Minister, he would not go to the extent of laying it down as a disqualification. Undesirable, then, but not unconstitutional. That is how the founding fathers would describe Jayalalitha’s appointment as Chief Minister and that is how it is. |
Rush for "Gold Rush"
A record rush of visitors to witness the screening of Charlie Chaplin's latest masterpiece "Gold Rush" at the Excelsior Theatre baffled all efforts of the management to provide accommodation to all that came; and hundreds had to return disappointed for want of room. The highly engrossing story embodied in this picture and the new role in which Charlie Chaplin appears in it, claiming the admiration of his spectators, have everywhere succeeded in drawing unprecedented audience. We think, therefore, that in order to give opportunity to all that wish to see this film the management will do well to extend the period of exhibiting it in Lahore. |
|
SPIRITUAL NUGGETS Know that the Prophet built an external Kaba Of clay and water, And an inner Kaba in life and heart. The outer Kaba was built by Abraham, The Holy; The inner is sanctified by the glory of God Himself. — Ansari, Mystic of Herat. From S.J. Singh, The Persian Mystics Spiritual life does not consist of loud prayers and frenzied dancing they only upset the peace and quiet of early morning. Walking on water is not spirituality nor is praying on mats suspended in mid air. They alone may be called mystics, O Bahu, who have enshrined the Friend in their hearts. ***** God does not live in the highest heaven, nor can be found in the holy shrine of Ka'ba. No one ever ever found him through learning or by knowing the scriptures... ***** Formal prayer and prostration are feeble pursuits. Fasting has little merit, other than to save food. Only they go on pilgrimages to Mecca who are not wanted at home. Only they pray loudly, professing their devotion, who are deceptive of intent. But those who have found God's name in their hearts care not to fast nor prostrate themselves in formal prayer. — Abyaat-e-Baahoo, 177,178,183. From J.S. Puri and K.S. Khak, Sultan Bahu |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
