 |
|
New ‘nikahnama’ Defence Tribunal |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Unhealthy Capital Many lead a dangerous life in Delhi MANY would give their left arm to abandon their village or town and live in Delhi instead because being in the national capital is considered synonymous with a good life. Such Delhi lovers apparently do not know much about the quality of life in the city of their dreams.
Confusion in Indian policy
Our cultural disrespect
Why unbundle PSEB? Move to abolish
CAT? Delhi Durbar
|
New ‘nikahnama’ THE much-awaited model ‘nikahnama’ has been given its seal of approval by the All-India Muslim Personal Board. It should be acceptable to all sections of the Muslims as it tries to meet a long-felt need of the community. With the rights of husband and wife elaborated in the 14-page document, now the woman will be in a better position to fight for justice in the event of a dispute with her husband. Declaring the woman as the “owner of the household” and asking for the payment of “meher” by the husband in the form of gold or silver, preferably at the time of marriage, are steps towards strengthening her position. It is good that the move for reform has come from within the community. The “nikahnama” makes “talaq” a little difficult because it will no longer be acceptable without the intervention of an authorised “qazi”. A marriage will be treated as null and void in the eyes of law and society only when the “qazi” declares it as such — of course, after studying the arguments from both sides. There is also an attempt to prevent such an eventuality as the “nikahnama” mentions that the detested practice of “talaq” by uttering this word thrice at a time should be shunned. If “talaq” is pronounced only once there is scope for reconciliation. But this is not enough. There must be some kind of punishment for people indulging in this heinous activity. The Personal Law Board will have some explaining to do for not including “khula”— a woman’s right to seek divorce — in the “nikahnama”. It may be accused by women’s rights organisations of discriminating against fair sex. The board members have missed an opportunity to prevent the practice of having more than one wife through their model “nikahnama”. They could have included a clause to enable a woman to take an undertaking from her husband that under no circumstances will he go in for a second marriage so long as she was alive. The document should be amended to stop the misuse of a provision in the Islamic shariat — the source of the Personal Law — which allows a Muslim to have four wives at a time. May be, the board has chosen to move forward cautiously, and the new “nikahnama” is only the first step. |
|
Defence Tribunal THE Defence Minister’s statement in the Lok Sabha that the ministry was considering the setting up of an Armed Forces Tribunal to deal with service issues and appeals on court martial verdicts is a restatement of an old promise, and it is time he turned it into a reality. Thus far, aggrieved service personnel have had no option but to approach the civil courts for the redressal of their grievances, and several recent court verdicts have pointed to how messy the break-outs can get. The increasing number of petitions prompted the Army to issue a circular recently, pointing out that a very small percentage of cases filed by its personnel have been decided in their favour, with the bulk going in favour of the Army. Be that as it may, the civil courts should not need to be burdened with their complaints. While integrity is called for, any organisation will always have to deal with the fall-out of mistakes, if not wrong, or malafide, decisions. The military cannot afford to have merit as a basis of its hierarchical structure undermined. The presence of a tribunal can discourage flippant complaints. The legislation for this purpose has to be drafted carefully to ensure effectiveness and credibility. There will always be complaints, considering especially that promotional avenues necessarily shrink at higher rungs of the ladder. But complaints from the officer not picking up the next rank in the proposed tribunal will be a natural avenue for seeking early redress. This will be welcome by the men and officers of the armed forces. |
|
Unhealthy Capital MANY would give their left arm to abandon their village or town and live in Delhi instead because being in the national capital is considered synonymous with a good life. Such Delhi lovers apparently do not know much about the quality of life in the city of their dreams. A research on the status of the urban Delhi population comes as a rude shock. The study by Prof Anoop Misra of the department of internal medicine at the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences says 40 per cent of the population is overweight and one-third has insulin imbalance, abdominal obesity and high cholesterol levels that make them prone to diabetes, heart problems and high blood pressure. This tendency coupled with urban stress and high pollution levels is ruining even young residents. Thirty-year-olds are falling a prey to heart attacks and teenagers are reporting adult diabetics. In short, the life is neither healthy nor long. The research should come as an eye-opener. Eightytwo per cent of Delhi’s woman population past menopause is overweight. Full 2 per cent of the city’s general population is suffering from bronchial asthma. Apparently, the high pollution level and the growing habit of smoking have a lot to do with it. Researchers point out that lifestyle ailments are coming to India 10 years before they are seen in their western counterparts. The warning signals need to be heeded immediately. Unhealthy diet, lack of exercise and overindulgence make a lethal trio. At stake is the future of an entire generation. Parents have to firmly take in their hands the charge of what their wards eat. Parental affection should not mean allowing them to consume slow poison. At the same time, the administration too has to improve the quality of life in the urban area. In East Delhi, 60 per cent women have anaemia. If this is the state of affairs in the national capital, the situation in the rest of the country can only be imagined. |
|
Two wrongs don’t make a right, but they make a good excuse. — Thomas Szasz |
Confusion in Indian policy INDIA has almost blinked to the King of Nepal on the question of arms supply. These supplies were put on hold on February 1, 2005, following King Gyanendra’s coup against the democratic system and leadership. Following the first direct contact between King Gyanendra and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in Jakarta during the Afro-Asian commemorative conference, India agreed to release arms supplies if the King moved on the road to the restoration of political and democratic processes in Nepal. The King’s regime, however, embarrassed India by taking contrary steps after the Jakarta “understanding”. Former Prime Minister Deuba and other political leaders and activists were arrested in Kathmandu in a rather shabby and humiliating manner. This sting of the offence has, however, been blunted somewhat by the King through the withdrawal of the emergency — which in any case was about to lapse in two days’ time — after the King’s return to Kathmandu on April 30. But while withdrawing the emergency, the curbs and controls on political activities and freedom of expression have been left intact. India has welcomed this as a first step towards democracy, and may perhaps use it as a pretext of “compliance” by the King to start arms supplies to the Royal Nepal Army (RNA). The King has, no doubt, been keen to get the arms supplies from India restored. But the Manmohan Singh government had built up its own case to respond positively to the King’s request. Two arguments are being advanced by the interested sections in this respect. One, without these supplies, the Maoists will gain the upper hand in Nepal’s internal conflict. Two, the stoppage of arms supply will not only alienate nearly one lakh-strong Gurkha soldiers (61 battalions) in the Indian Army and the pro-India sections within the RNA, but will also allow Pakistan and China to step into the vacuum to India’s long-term disadvantage. These arguments may look persuasive on the face of it, but they do not hold much water on closer scrutiny. By no objective assessment can the Maoists be seen to be in a position to militarily overwhelm the Nepali State. They are in command in the rural areas, but have not demonstrated any will or capacity for military offensive. The one that they tried in Khara in Rolpa district in March was badly beaten by the RNA, resulting in the Maoists collecting nearly 200 dead. They have, however, been successful in road blocks and closing of schools. To counter such challenges, the RNA and the King’s regime need credibility and will power, not arms. There have not been many instances where the RNA has shown any credible initiative to engage the Maoists militarily. The prospects exist that some of the arms supplied to the RNA may fall into the hands of the Maoists if they manage to take the RNA by surprise as it happened many times in the past. There is yet another aspect to the King’s confrontation with the Maoists. The King’s regime has been trying to widen the theoretical and personality-based divisions within the Maoists. That is why serious differences that have cropped up between the Maoist chief, Prachanda, and his ideological colleague, Baburam Bhattarai, were exposed by the army in public. There have been reports that the Royal regime, since the breakdown of talks with the Maoists in August 2003, has been using all possible resources, including huge transfers of money, to get the factionalism widened among the Maoists and to get Baburam Bhattarai, an uncompromising ideologue and leader, marginalised. The regime has assiduously been trying to exploit these differences and explore the possibilities to strike a deal with a section of the Maoists’ dominant group. It is in the hope of cutting such a deal that the RNA has desisted from undertaking any major operations against the Maoists, particularly since the King’s coup. Therefore, any sense of urgency shown by the RNA for the supply of arms with reference to the Maoist gains must be taken with caution. The argument of Pakistan or China taking advantage of the freeze on Indian arms supplies to the RNA must also be taken with a pinch of salt. Pakistan and China need to be approached diplomatically by India in this respect. China surely will think hard before doing something that can vitiate its improving bilateral relations with India. In any case, these two countries cannot be of any substantial help to the RNA in the immediate context. China is also not insensitive to the fact that by going out of the way in helping a King who is isolated from its people as well as the international community, Beijing will only become unpopular with the Nepalese people. It is the monarchy that has time and again played the China and Pakistan cards more to force India to compromise rather than to increase Nepal’s dependence upon these two neighbours. India has several other means to thwart this ploy of the King rather than to succumb to it. Foreign Minister Natwar Singh should know this well on the basis of his experience under Rajiv Gandhi’s Prime Ministership during 1988-89 when he carried a stern message to the Nepal King to desist from seeking Chinese anti-aircraft guns and other weapons. Following this message, trade and economic restrictions were imposed by India on Nepal, resulting in the roll-back of the Panchayat system. Similarly, the argument of the Indian Gurkha soldiers getting alienated by the non-supply of arms to an authoritarian King is untenable. The Gurkhas in the Indian Army are the Indian recruits and they have to function under Indian policy parameters. They cannot be allowed to become a pressure group on India’s Nepal policy. India’s reconsideration on the arms supply issue even without any firm indication on the King’s part for the restoration of democracy is driven by other factors. That includes American preference that in Nepal fighting terrorism should be given priority over the restoration of democracy. There is also the influence of Indian princely houses with strong matrimonial relations with the Nepal royalty. And the King has been carefully cultivating other political constituencies, and decision-and-opinion-makers in India. The confusion and inconsistency in India’s Nepal policy are the result of these weaknesses. If India allows them to dictate its wider national interests in relation to immediate neighbours, its aspirations to play a major role in shaping Asian and global events will lose strength and
credibility. The writer is Professor, South Asian Studies, JNU, New Delhi. |
Our cultural disrespect THE packed audience inside the Town Hall auditorium in Ahmedabad listened in pindrop silence as sitar maestro Ravi Shankar probed the intricacies of the “Kalyani” raga. The mood was one of contended ecstasy and the irritation of a delayed start because of the non arrival of the chief guest was forgotten. Fifty minutes into the concert, the auditorium doors were flung open to admit a group of about 10 people. The centre of attraction was the chief guest, the then Chief Minister, Hitendra Desai who was surrounded by lackeys, guards and the programme organisers. Ravi Shankar stopped playing as the chief guest was led to his chair and Desai seemed happy that the audience attention, at least for the time being, had shifted from the sitarist to himself. After about 40 minutes, the VVIP group left the auditorium, causing another interruption. There was much bowing and scraping as Desai was escorted out of the hall. After the concert was over a furious Ravi Shankar in an off-the-record chat denounced the tendency among his countrymen to invite VIPs who knew nothing of the fine arts to preside over concerts. “It does not happen anywhere else in the world,” he fumed. “In the West, my concerts had never been interrupted with the late arrival of a chief guest. Mind you, some of the highest ranking statesmen and leaders are present in these.” This incident is nearly 35 years old, but things had not changed much. Only last month, the Hubli-Dharwar Municipal Corporation organised a function to felicitate 93-year-old doyen of North Indian classical music Gangubai Hangal, a recipient of Padma Bhushan and more recently the Padma Vibhushan. Karnataka Chief Minister Dharam Singh who was to preside over the function, kept everyone waiting and arrived nearly two hours late. After spending just 10 minutes and making some cursory remarks, he left to attend another function. An upset Gangubai Hangal announced that she was not amused and would return the “Powra Sanman” to the hosts, the Hubli-Dharwar Municipal Corporation. We have this national obsession to invite political leaders and ministers to preside over cultural functions, put up with their late arrivals and inane speeches. But what is worse is the lack of respect and mutual appreciation among our artistes. Every field of art is saturated with its own politics, gossip and backbiting and those who do contribute significantly are seldom appreciated by their own colleagues in the profession. Recently, Mumbai theatre personality Dinesh Thakur’s 29-year-old group ANK celebrated the 1000th staging of popular Hindi comedy, “Hai Mera Dil”. No other Hindi play came anywhere near this unique record and Dineshji had not missed a single performance as its hero! As fans packed the Prithvi auditorium in Mumbai, Thakur had the courtesy to mention the names and present bouquets to everyone who had been associated with the production, including actors who had played the different parts in the play over the years. It was a touching gesture, much appreciated. But it was shocking that no other theatre personality was present at the special, 1000th show. Not one from the Gujarati, English or even Hindi stage! It was simply unbelievable that the rest of the Mumbai stage chose to ignore such a major cultural event which went into the record books. What was the reason? Envy, mere callousness, or the typical “what is the big deal” attitude? I could not fathom it. When achievements like this are ignored by art groups, possibly due to petty reasons, it does not reflect well on the world of culture . As for the elitist Mumbai media, papers which had written columns on the long runs of plays like “Mouse Trap” coolly ignored the “Hai Mera Dil” event. What a sad state of
affairs!
|
Why unbundle PSEB? Privatising or unbundling public sector enterprises/ boards in India/Punjab should be seen as a part of the policy shift made in July, 1991. That policy shift has been given the nomenclature of New Economic Policy (NEP). The NEP largely resembles the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) prescribed by the IMF and the World Bank as a future development strategy for developing countries towards the end of the 1970s. The SAP, in turn, is a modified form of Washington Consensus — better call it ‘Washington diktat”. The Washington Consensus and the SAP were prescribed to serve the interest of the US “corporatocrary” (a coalition of government, banks and corporations) as defined by John Perkins in his recent book, “Confessions of an Economic Hitman”. Perkins in his book has made startling revelations about the secrets and the modus-operandi of the US National Security Agency (NSA). It is worth noting that John Perkins has been working for the NSA as an “Economic Hitman” for a few decades. He accuses the American Government and the international aid agencies — the World Bank, the IMF and USAID — of cheating developing countries out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then by dictating repayment terms, essentially controlling their economy. Joseph E. Stiglitz’s book “Globalisation and Its Discontents” is another very significant work which makes important revelations about the WB, the IMF and the WTO. He is critical of the policies of these agencies as they are not going to serve even the interests of the developed countries, not to talk of the interests of the developing countries. A Nobel laureate in economics, Stiglitz has been an economic adviser to the White House and Vice-President of the World Bank for a number of years. Much prior to the views of Perkins and Stiglitz, even liberal economists such as Prebisch, Myrdal and Singar opposed the unrestricted play of market forces as it has led to an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor countries. According to these economists, unregulated trade and free capital movements are the media through which economic progress in the advanced countries percolates its backward effects in the underdeveloped world. The latest phase of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation supports free trade and free flow of capital, much to the disadvantage of labour and developing countries. Though all these economists have been supporters of the market-driven economy, yet they have left a note of caution before going in for privatisation of public sector enterprises. Even Dr Manmohan Singh, himself a renowned economist, in his convocation address at the PGI, Chandigarh, on April 13, 2005, (reported in The Tribune, April 14, 2005) cautioned that excessive privatisation may lead to creation of two worlds. It is in this context that while going in for privatisation and disinvestment, the government must first try to improve the functioning of the public sector rather than outrightly taking a decision in favour of privatisation. Rather than getting convinced that the public sector has all ills and the private sector has all virtues, the need of the hour is to take decision in larger interests of the population instead of serving the interest of private companies. It is always better to learn from experience. Just to mention two examples: One, India was going to allow convertibility on capital account but saved itself from an impending disaster by learning from the experience of South East Asian Nations in 1997. Two, the experience of a number of Latin American countries, which adopted SAP in the 1980s, has been very discouraging in terms of growth rate, unemployment, balance of trade, external debt and inflation. Almost all of these countries experienced deceleration in the per capita growth rate of GDP, a high level of inflation, unemployment, unfavourable trade balance and rising foreign debt. We must learn from their experiences. Instead of adopting and implementing the Fund-Bank prescription in toto, we must evolve policies which are best suited to the ground realities in our country. The decision about the unbundling of the PSEB must also be reviewed in the framework of past experience. It is a known fact that the experience of some other states about unbundling their SEBs has not produced good results. The experience of Orissa, Haryana, Andhra Pradesh and Delhi can be quoted as an example. The PSEB Engineers Association, in its recent document (given to all MLAs and MPs in Punjab), has highlighted that the power subsidy amount increased from Rs 850.4 crore to Rs 1,982 crore and the losses have increased from Rs 88.52 crore to Rs 1194.04 crore after the unbundling of the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Board. As a result of the unbundling, transmission losses came down from 33.1 per cent to 29.39 per cent but the average tariff has gone up from 156 paise per unit to 222 paise per unit. That document also reveals that the power subsidy amount went up from Rs 1,063 crore to Rs 1,244 crore after the unbundling of the Haryana Electricity Board. Prior to unbundling, the HSEB earned a profit of Rs 669 crore, but after unbundling, the board’s collective loss was Rs 1537.37 crore. Line losses have gone up from 32.8 per cent to 38.21 per cent and the average tariff rate increased from 155.3 paise to 225.37 paise. More so, the Electricity Act, 2003, is an enabling legislation which allows the state government to retain generation and distribution under one integrated company as mentioned by the Engineers Association. Besides the engineers, the other stake-holders viz consumers in all sectors do not want unbundling of the PSEB. The state has already witnessed huge demonstrations against the unbundling move, from the PSEB workers, trade unions and farmers’ unions. Given the experience of the other states and the spirited opposition to the unbundling decision, the Government of Punjab must give serious thought before going with its decision of unbundling of the PSEB. The experience of other states is a clear indication that consumers would have to pay more for their electricity consumption and the government may have to enhance subsidy. The state has the right to take the decision but the decision or policy shift must be in the larger interest of the state and a larger section of the people and in the framework of the relaxations provided in the Electricity Act, 2003. The writer is a Professor of Economics at Punjabi University, Patiala. |
|
Move to abolish
CAT? THE decision of the Cabinet Committee to amend the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, has agitated employees who wonder why the government is trying to dismantle a quasi-judicial institution like the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which has been created on the pressing demands of the people and due to circumstantial exigencies. The State Administrative Tribunals (SAT) are also on the target. About two decades ago, it was realised that cases dealing with service conditions of government employees were kept pending not for weeks or months but for years. Employees used to retire, waiting for a hearing of their case. The high officials used to sit on the file just because, “the matter is sub judice”. The very purpose of the litigation to seek relief was defeated. This led to the setting up of administrative tribunals in India in 1985. Now 17 benches of the CAT are functioning. In the beginning, there was a two-tier system as the appeal of the CAT order used to be before the Supreme Court. But keeping in view of the huge number of cases before the apex court it was decided in 1997 that the appeal should be routed through the respective high courts, making it a three-tier system. Despite this, the disposal of cases is quick and every case is decided within six months or at the most in a year. The bureaucrats were not happy with this quasi-judicial process. They found it offensive that the institution, which was their brainchild started teaching lessons to the bureaucracy. Most cases of litigation are the outcome of a lethargic attitude and non-application of mind by the bureaucracy. Therefore, this is the only segment, which is opposing the CAT. The argument put forward for amending the Act is that there is no provision either in Article 323A of the Constitution of India or the Tribunals Act, 1985, to abolish such quasi-judicial institutions. And that they are only inserting the amendments and may not exercise the same in reality. But this is an absurd move because once the Tribunals Act is amended, the Union Government will definitely abolish all the CATs and SATs. The litigation process through the tribunals is the cheapest mode of getting relief. The lawyers of the CAT do not charge exorbitant fees. An aggrieved employee can contest his own case without difficulty. The registration fee is very nominal i.e. Rs 50. The Union Government should apply its mind before winding up an institution, which has been functioning smoothly for the past two decades providing relief to the aggrieved employees. |
|
|
Delhi Durbar IT may be a post that promises no fat pay cheques, but nevertheless causes envy. To be selected Professor Emeritus as any academic worth his salt would tell you is a big honour. The recent announcement of Jawaharlal Nehru University Vice Chancellor G K Chadha as Professor Emeritus has, however, caused more than envy. Eyebrows are being raised over the procedure followed to declare the VC, who has also found a coveted place in the Prime Minister’s economic advisory council, as Professor Emeritus. It was pointed out that the VC, who is also the Chairperson of the Academic Council that clears the names for the post, was himself presiding over the meeting in which the decision was taken. Those complaining claim that the procedure is flawed because Professor Chadha is still a serving VC and, secondly, he should not have chaired that particular meeting. In
defence of deals? There is hushed talk in the corridors of power that Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s relations with Law Minister H R Bhardwaj are not on an even keel. Allegations are flying thick and fast that the Defence Ministers, past and present, have some kind of an unwritten association of not to raise dirt against one another. Bhardwaj reportedly insists that the affidavit, which created a storm, was the doing of the Ministry of Defence. In terms of administrative acumen and efficiency, Mukherjee stands tall among his ministerial colleagues. That Prime Minister Manmohan Singh relies on him heavily is clear from the fact that Mukherjee heads several ministerial committees. To put an end to wagging tongues against him, Mukherjee wants to put all the defence deals finalised by his predecessor George Fernandes to be examined with a fine toothcomb. Low-profile adviser By the very nature of his job and demeanour, National Security Adviser M K Narayanan prefers to remain low key. He is not as high profile as the late J N Dixit. Nevertheless, his role in key affairs of national security and foreign policy cannot be undermined. Narayanan played his part unobtrusively during the recent visit of President Pervez Musharraf. He paid careful attention to the drafting of the joint statement and stressed on the inclusion of the January 6, 2004 statement issued in Islamabad on the sidelines of the SAARC summit. On the winning side Noted lyricist Javed Akhtar makes no bones about the fact that he has an ulterior motive in supporting women’s issues. At an event the other day in the Capital, speaking on violence against women, the poet said while he has no reasons to feel proud of his stand because this was expected of any decent man, he was also of the view that tomorrow belongs to women. He was emphatic that women can conquer anything, including wars, and in supporting them he was only aiming to be on the winning side. Contributed by Smriti Kak Ramachandran, Prashant Sood and S
Satyanarayanan. |
|
|
From the pages of Incarceration of Banerjee
Unity is strength. This is an axiomatic truth. The truth has been forced upon us with almost a violence by the Anglo-Indian community. Their united exertions in keeping down the Native by a regular counteraction throughout India and by their sustained efforts in England to prejudice the good English people at home against the just rights of the Native, have opened our eyes to the power unity possesses. We have learnt a great deal from the Anglo-Indians, and we must thank them again for this valuable lesson which they have so forcibly impressed upon us. India has not, it seems, been very slow in benefiting by it. An occasion was offered to her people for the demonstration of this feeling of unity at the incarceration of Babu Surendranath Banerjee. The Bengalees, Hindustanees, Punjabees, Marhattas, Parsees and Afghans vied with each other in offering their sympathies to him. |
As a mother, even at the risk of her life, protects her son, her only son, so let him who has recognised the truth, cultivate goodwill among all beings without measure. — The Buddha There is but one true Lord in the world; there is no other. — Guru Nanak There are good souls, calm and magnanimous, who do good to others as does the spring, and who, having themselves crossed this dreadful ocean of birth and death, help others also to cross the same, without any motive whatsoever. — Sri Adi Sankaracharya Despondency is not religion, whatever else it may be. By being pleasant always and smiling, it takes you nearer to God, nearer than any prayer. — Swami Vivekananda The grace of God is the thing that is needful. One should pray for the grace of God — Sarada Devi
 |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
