 |
|
High time for presidential form of govt Why inter-civilisational
dialogue is important |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On Record
Profile Small family norm must for MLAs
Diversities — Delhi Letter
|
High time for presidential form of govt OVER the years, the parliamentary system of government has created many problems. Consequently, various sections have been demanding a switch over to the presidential form of government. The present system has made our social life corrupt. This has placed absolute powers in the hands of the elected representatives. They remain in power by hook or by crook and have divided society into narrow domestic walls of castes and religions. The spirit of oneness or the idea of nationhood is sacrificed at the altar of electoral victory. Therefore, it is necessary to reduce the authority of the elected representatives for public good. Here the objective is not to destroy the democratic functioning of the government but to change its form. The American model of presidential form of government is well suited for India. The President is elected directly by the people for a period of four years. He appoints a team of Secretaries who are answerable to the President alone. Similarly, in the US’ federal states, there is a Governor. The members of the House of Representative are also elected by the people for a short tenure of two years, but they cannot vote out the elected Governor. Therefore, he is immune from the day-to-day pulls and pressures of the elected representatives as in India. If the presidential system is introduced in India, MPs and MLAs would not be able to interfere directly in the day-to-day administration. The officers at the Centre and in the states can work without fear and favour. They cannot be transferred peremptorily. The US President or the Governor appoints deserving and qualified people as secretaries with a fixed tenure. If we have presidential form, we won’t be subject to the drama of defections and coalition politics as witnessed in Goa and Jharkhand recently. India is a country of diversities. It therefore needs a special Constitution to ensure unity in diversity. Our Founding Fathers searched for models in the homogenous countries like the UK, France and Canada. They wanted every ethnic, religious, linguistic group to maintain its identity, but failed to suggest strong measures for achieving unity in diversity. Hence the need for a switch over to the presidential form of government. The present form of government has proved to be most expensive and divisive. There is a lurking fear that the President may turn autocratic. But a strong Prime Minister or a Chief Minister, with a thumping majority in the Lok Sabha or in the State Assembly may also turn autocratic. The presidential form of government may not root out corruption altogether, but it will check the corrupt practices of those who were supposed to be models of honesty and
integrity.
**** The writer is Member, Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shimla |
|
Why inter-civilisational
dialogue is important HEIR to a brilliant, composite cultural legacy, India is poised for a giant leap into a future of technological leadership, economic prosperity and cultural flowering. We hold a mirror to the world, in which virtually all civilisations and racial groups can see themselves. With a cutting edge technological infrastructure and world class human resource base, a buoyant economy that moves ahead at a fast clip of around 7 per cent yearly growth, India is emerging as a major international presence. The deep anchor of civilisational values, a remarkable Constitution and thriving democracy ensure that the march into a prosperous future is not derailed. Let’s examine what globalisation means and what are its promises and perils. Like most people in the developing world, I have mixed feelings about the relentless onrush of globalisation, which threatens to inundate us with entirely unfamiliar cultural patterns, modes of production and consumption, and new social and moral orientations. As globalisation raises expectations of a better quality of life for the middle and upper middle classes in the years ahead, it also threatens to disrupt older life patterns, impoverish local communities and destroy livelihoods at less economically developed levels. Globalisation is a double-edged sword that cuts both ways: it can accelerate economic development and prosperity of people worldwide, but it can also destabilise less developed societies and deepen inequities. The developing world had been assured that globalisation would have a humane face, but the promise is yet to be fulfilled in any meaningful measure. Globalisation also tends to create and aggravate inequity among countries. However, it entails a contraction of the world and collapsing of distances because of growing air travel, internet and e-mail. New military technologies that enable powerful countries to strike with extraordinary swiftness and devastating fire power, have made the weaker countries more vulnerable to diplomatic pressure. New doctrines like Total Spectrum Dominance and Pre-emptive Strike make things more uncertain in a world where old doctrines of international legitimacy are giving way to more innovative ideas. The world has become more dangerous after the Cold War. It is clear why an inter-civilisational dialogue is needed today. It has at its centre the issues of “identity”, “otherness” and “hybridity”, to use familiar terms from related academic discourse. In short, it is about who we are. And who are the others who are not “we”. It is also about “in-between-ness”, that is, hybrid identities that combine elements of different, often contesting, identities like the Jewish citizen of Nazi Germany, in the extreme instance. However, on a closer analysis, most identities are composed of different elements without any conflict among those elements. Coming from an Indo-Islamic background, I knew early from experience that God had intended the world to have a plural character, a home to all colours, creeds and castes. The Quran clearly lays out that if God had so wanted He would have made everyone a Muslim. From this and from my social milieu, I learnt that difference had not only to be tolerated, but accepted, even celebrated. This is how in the great cauldron of time all kinds of civilisations have come together to form a larger human civilisation with almost standardised norms of civility, compassion and truthfulness. Western Christianity (as opposed to the Orthodox Church) was alleged to be on a collision course with the world of Islam, which would possibly be supported by the Chinese civilisation. This idea was rejected by some of the top Western political leaders and academics. However, following the 9/11 attacks, the war in Afghanistan and Iraq came to confirm some of our worst fears about Prof Huntington’s theory. That the conflict could escalate to assume the proportions of a truly inter-civilisational scale was evident from Paul Wolfowitz’s claim that nearly 60 countries could be on target in a “rolling war” that could last more than a decade. True to his claims, the war rolled on to Iraq after making mincemeat of the Taliban. It is no coincidence that if we exclude North Korea, the number of targeted countries is almost identical to the membership of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC). That we had been moving dangerously towards a future which nobody really wanted was quite obvious. By the time of the Millennium Summit at the UN, a counter movement was well on its way. It was called ‘Dialogue Between Civilisations’ with full backing of the UN and the world community, which was determined to start a positive trend. Though Gandhi, Nehru and, in our own time, Datuk Seri Dr Anwar Ibrahim (former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia), had been working on the idea much earlier, many clear voices were heard in its favour, including those of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Iranian President Syed Mohammad Khatami. Since then, the support for it has grown exponentially. New Delhi too has played an extraordinary role in the formation and leadership of the Non-Aligned Movement, the movement for the liberation of the Afro-Asian people, and now the movement for a just world order and dialogue between civilisations. Two years ago, the Government of India had hosted a similar meet in New Delhi, which was inaugurated by the Prime Minister and attended by delegates from 80 countries. In April 2005, the Institute of Objective Studies (IOS), the NGO which I head, has shown that in India, like other democracies, non-state actors play a significant role in public life. In fact, IOS has been at the forefront of the dialogue between communities, faiths and civilisations since its inception in 1986. The IOS has been contributing significant research in social sciences and articulating issues of concern to national and international life. The international conference titled ‘Inter-civilisational dialogue in a globalising world’ was an invitation to all of us to don our thinking caps. With its amazing diversity of flora and fauna, climates, beliefs and ways of worship, racial types and cultural patterns, India has proved to be the right setting in which inter-civilisational deliberations of such far-reaching consequences should be taking
place.
***** The writer is Chairman, Institute of Objective Studies, New Delhi |
|
On Record
PROFESSOR G. K. Chadha’s tenure as the Vice-Chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) comes to an end in June. Having worked hard to put JNU on the global map as a centre of excellence, he feels “happy and content”. A distinguished economist and member of the Prime Minister’s Economic Advisory Council, he is eagerly waiting to return to his “religion” — research. In an interview to The Sunday Tribune, Prof Chadha claims that his three-year tenure was without any major roadblocks, thanks to the support of his students and colleagues. Excerpts: Q: How would you describe your three-year tenure in JNU? A:
When I took over, there were grave challenges, the foremost being the recruitment of faculty. Since we did not have a Visitor’s Nominee we could not hire against those vacancies. Today we have resolved that crisis to a great extent though there are still many vacancies. The faculty, particularly the youngsters who have joined us as Associate and Assistant Professors in the last few years, have lived up to our expectations and have proved their academic credentials. Secondly, I can take the liberty of calling it a global university today owing to the position it has earned. We could strengthen our image. Many reputed foreign universities have signed MoUs with us for students and faculty exchange programmes. Q: Considering the respect JNU commands overseas and the demand for its teaching-learning method, is it planning to open its doors abroad? A: JNU is not a commercial enterprise. It is a university with a social responsibility. We do not have any immediate plans of setting up regional centres or offshore centres although many countries have dropped hints that they would like to have us there. We recently revived our MoU with Venezuela and there are exchange programmes with Korea, Germany, the US and France. Our students can go to London School of Economics and we have recently tied up with the Elbert Ludwig University in Germany whereby their students will come to JNU for a month. Q: What are your achievements as the Vice-Chancellor? A: I believe in complete democratisation. I followed this during my tenure. Democracy means open discussions, opinions and even dissent. There has been no major confrontation during my tenure. I have been able to strike a rapport with students; I have the support and understanding of the faculty and non-teaching staff. I have also been able to push forward the process of academic decision-making back to the school-level and decentralised the whole working, which seems to be working well. Schools are the kingpins of all academic decision-making. I have ensured through discussion, appeal and all possible means to assure the Deans of all schools that it is for them to take all the vital decisions. We have been able to get UGC grant of Rs 30 crore under the ‘University with Potential for Excellence’ schme. This is being used for bettering the infrastructure and improving the quality of study and research. We have the maximum number of special assistance grants and programmes. But by far the biggest achievement has been that we have strengthened the mechanism to combat the evil of sexual harassment. Q: What about the funds? A: It is totally inadequate because we have the biggest stock of best students. The number of scholarships has not at all been increased. Students have been persuading the university administration to take some steps. Which is why we have through an internal mechanism helped students raise funds. There are certain jobs within the university, which we offer to these students where they work for a few hours and earn some money. We also have some merit-cum-means scholarships. But I am worried that the number of students without scholarships is not a very small number. The government needs to put in place some special measures. Q: There was a proposal to invite industry to the campus. What is the status of that proposal? A: We had some discussions on the possibility of an academia-industry interface. We have not worked very hard on that front in the country. In JNU we have prepared a vision document, which also deals with this aspect. There was a proposal to let the industry use the land available in JNU for the construction of academic parks, build some auditoria among other things but it has not been able to take off. There are reservations that we may lose control over the land but I am hopeful that through dialogue we will be able to take up the issue. Besides, we are now looking at the alumni to contribute to the university not just in terms of finances but technical know-how. Our alumni are well-placed and well spread over and we want them to help students with information and counselling about what is new worldwide. For this purpose we have also set up a special committee. It is good for universities to start becoming self-sufficient in some ways but it is a process that will take time. |
Profile by Harihar Swarup Dan David, unlike Nobel, is little known in India. Besides being a member of the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University, 76-year-old David is inventor of a new photographic technology and worked as journalist and photographer in Israel. Born on May 23, 1929 in Bucharest, Romania, he studied economics and technical methodology and applied his research to industrial photography. Until 1949, he was a member of the Central Committee of Zionist Youth Organisation —‘Hazioni’ in Rumania. The award is given in three fields — archaeology, performing arts and material science — in the dimensional time frame of past, present and future. Having been known as ‘Grand old man’ of Indian science, Prof Rao has received many prestigious awards but never before he was so elated when bestowed with Dan David honour for material science in the Future Time Dimension. One can understand his delight as the award is in recognition of his achievements that impact the world. The Dan David Foundation at Tel Aviv University annually identifies such attainments. “This is a high point of my career. I have received several awards but this is like the Nobel Prize. The standards are very high here and such a major award is being bestowed on an Indian after a long gap since C.V. Raman got the Nobel Prize in 1930”, Prof Rao said shortly before the award ceremony. One of the earliest scientists to synthesise two-dimensional oxide materials, Prof Rao’s work has led to a systematic study of compositionally controlled metal-insulator transitions. His group of 20 students works on futuristic applications in medicine and technology with atomic precision. There is also research in superconductivity, to make materials lose resistance to current at room temperature, that could revolutionise the power transmission, electronics and transport industries. “The studies hold unusual promise and have a profound impact in application fields like colossal magneto and high temperature superconductivity”, says citation of the Award. Prof Rao’s biography, written by Mohan Sundara Rajan is, perhaps, the most authentic account of his personal life and his half-a-century long journey in the realm of science. There was a time when he had to borrow money to acquire a new suit for his Ph.D interview. A wide variety of books produced by him are textbooks for the students all over the world. Prof Rao has made his life one with science. An early riser, he reaches his lab by 8 a.m. and works continuously with a passion few have seen. There are no weekends, no holidays for him. Prof Rao was the Director of the prestigious Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, for two consecutive terms (1984-94). His struggle to achieve excellence is indeed remarkable. After obtaining his M.Sc degree in 1953 from the Banaras Hindu University, he was enrolled in the reputed laboratories in the US (Purdue and Berkeley). He obtained his Ph.D in just two years and nine months. In the mid-1960’s, solid state physics was known to scientists and electronic engineers but not solid state chemistry as a separate subject. This gave Prof Rao a golden opportunity to realise on of his early ideas. So, on the birth centenary of Jawaharlal Nehru, he took up the bold step of fashioning in 1984 an autonomous centre called the Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research. He was the President of the Centre till 1999. Prof Rao’s personality is best summed up by his grandson, Karthik, a student of medicine: “My grandpa is a very, very balanced man, a multi-faceted personality. He spends a lot of time at home and, in addition, he is into everything. He is an expert in other fields of sciences and loves fine arts. Music in particular, has been a passion with
him.” |
|
Small family norm must for MLAs Several states such as Rajasthan, Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh have enacted legislation to ensure that those contesting for panchayat and municipal elections observe small family norm. Otherwise, they would be ineligible to contest such elections. Gujarat would soon follow suit. The Vajpayee government promulgated the National Population Policy in 2000. In a judgement given in response to a public interest litigation, the Supreme Court stated that population explosion was “indeed a matter of concern”. The Constitution (Seventy-Ninth Amendment) Bill, 1992, which was introduced in the Rajya Sabha on December 22, 1992, envisaged promoting small family norm among the members of Parliament and state legislatures. The Bill has not been pursued due to lack adequate will on the part of those in power from time to time. In fact, there was disturbing news that the Centre was planning to scrap the Bill. This would indeed be a retrograde step. Himachal Pradesh has already committed this mistake. The aforesaid Bill sought to amend the Constitution in several respects including two aspects, namely, amendment of Article 47 for adding a new Directive Principle to the effect the state shall endeavour to promote population control and the small family norm; and amendment of Article 51A to provide that it shall be the duty of every citizen to promote and adopt the family norm. The most important changes proposed by the constitutional amendment Bill could be said to be the provision for disqualification of legislators. The Bill proposes amendments in Articles 102 and 191 as well as insertion of a new Schedule giving details of disqualification. These provisions provide that a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of House if he had more than two children. The Statement of Objects and Reasons for the constitutional amendment Bill gives a clear justification by referring to the figures of 1991 census which indicates India’s population as 844.3 million. These figures reflected a growth rate of 2.5 per cent, that is an increase of 17 million people every year. Stabilisation of population was, therefore, the single most important factor which was the prime reason for initiating the proposal for constitutional amendment. This proposal has not been pursued by any of the political parties with earnestness. India’s population has increased to 1, 027 million as on March 1, 2003 as per the census of 2001 and it is among the ten most populous countries of the world, second only to China on top of the list. On the other hand, the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 and similar legislations in other states were enacted clearly with the objective of popularising family planning and family welfare programmes. The Haryana legislation was challenged in the courts in Javed’s case and the matter came before the Supreme Court which has decided the case recently upholding its constitutional validity. The judgement was delivered by Justice R.C. Lahoti, now the Chief Justice of India. Several constitutional grounds were given in the writ petitions for challenging the said legislation, i.e. violation of Article 14, as the legislation was allegedly arbitrary and discriminatory; that it adversely affected personal freedom to have as many children as one wanted and thus violated Article 25 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court repelled all these challenges and upheld the legislation. The court found no merit in the challenge under Article 14 since, according to the court, the Haryana legislation was based on reasonable classification, for it distinguished persons not having more than two living children from others. The classification was thus based on intelligible differentia. Further, the legislation was consistent with the National Population Policy and as such it served the object of popularising family welfare and family planning programmes. The legislation also had a nexus with its avowed purpose and was not
violative of Article 14. The court also rejected the argument of hostile discrimination that Parliament had not enacted similar legislation with respect to state legislature or Parliament. It was the court’s view that there was no constitutional imperative to implement a policy in one go and that such a policy could be implemented in a phased manner as the circumstances permitted. Hence, the court found nothing wrong in the Haryana legislation subscribing to the national movement of population control and helping the entire citizenry of the country. The Supreme Court ruled that if a religious practice went against public order, national morality or collective health of the nation’s people, it must give way to the good of the people and other like considerations. It has also upheld the constitutional validity of the Haryana Municipal (Second Amendment) Act, 1994 which inserted Section 13A in the Act disqualifying a person from contesting a municipal election, on similar constitutional grounds. The Government of India can neither pursue the pending Constitution Amendment Bill or withdraw the same and enact an ordinary legislation amending the Representation of the People Act, 1951 without amendment of Articles 47 and 51A which can take place at a later stage. It may be recalled that constitutional amendment requires special majority under Article 368 unlike an ordinary legislation. Articles 102 and 191 respectively already provide that a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as and for being a member of either House of Parliament. Since the Constitution already provides for disqualification on the ground of legislation made by Parliament, an amendment of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 can serve the purpose. Thus, it is the duty of all Indian citizens to do all in their might to carry forward the task of small family norm. The Government of India also must show the necessary courage to pursue the goal rather than abandon it. The states should also adopt legislation similar to the ones enacted by Haryana and other states. **** The writer is a former Secretary in the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India |
|
|
Diversities — Delhi Letter
When I had last met him at his official residence on Canning Lane, the place was so tight that I couldn’t help but comment. He said that some of the rooms were being used by Sadbhavna Sipahis, the volunteer youth working for the NGO floated by him. In the last general elections, the work done by these Sipahis in the villages was tremendous. Some of them told me that they were drawn to him not just because of his personality but because he actually practised what he preached. A secularist to the core, he was determined to halt the politics of religious divide and hate. Though my last interview with him couldn’t Now, off with the final journey...
Greatness of
Ismail Merchant Another big loss is the death of filmmaker Ismail Merchant on May 25. I always maintain that books are what one leaves behind and in Ismail’s case he leaves behind his autobiography, ‘My Passage to India’ (Roli Books). Soon after his demise, his publisher, Pramod Kapoor, had this to say about him: “I came late into his life. Five years ago he called me on my mobile: “Hi Pramod, this is Ismail Merchant.” Being used to prank calls I said, “If you are Ismail Merchant, I am Shashi Kapoor.” Little did I know that that real life call and my prankster-like reply would lead to an enduring friendship that went much beyond an author-publisher relationship. “Come and have lunch with me in The Ivy in Soho. I have invited Greta Scacchi. Just the three of us. She wants to meet you, my publisher.” Could I refuse the invitation?” Kapoor says that Ismail was born after six sisters and that he was patriarch to his family and that the family looked upon him as a hero, the world saw him as a star. To his mother, he was a gift from Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, a man who became a Khadim. On occasions he would sweep the floor in Ajmer Sharif, give alms to the poor and cover the sacred shrine with yards of clothes with the reverence that only the devout can have. Kapoor gets sentimental and adds: “The last time we were in London, Ismail had organised a private viewing of his film “In Custody” at a preview theatre in Soho for my family and our close friends....Much like Alfred Hitchcock, Ismail would make an appearance however small, in almost all the films he made. In a moving scene in “In Custody” he appeared for a few minutes as a pallbearer carrying poet Nur’s coffin. Going by his past record I wouldn’t be surprised, if he came alive and made an appearance, however small at his own burial in Mumbai…”
Rabindra Jayanthi The India International Centre organised an evening of Rabindra Sangeet recently. It was presented by Debarati Shome of the Rabindra Bharti University. Coinciding with the event, a book of the poems of Rabindranath Tagore hit the stands. Published by UBSPD in association with Visva Bharati (Shantiniketan), it’s edited by the late Humayun Kabir. Almost 40 years back, Humayun Kabir had brought together 18 literary figures to translate 101 poems of Rabindranath Tagore. These poems, which have been put together in this volume, had been written over a period of 60 years, the first as early as 1881 and the last barely a week before his death. There are a number of manuscript pages and 20 colour reproductions of his paintings. It’s really a magnificent volume. n
Dagar’s Dhrupad Last weekend, a special concert was held in memory of Zahiruddin Dagar. I had heard him and his younger brother, the late Faiyazuddin Dagar at several concerts in the 80s. Their jugalbandi was almost magical, rendering the air with ‘dagarwani’, a spiritual sort of special rendering. This tradition has been going on unbroken for the last 21 generations when a Dagar was a court musician in the court of Mughal Emperor Akbar. Today, the 21 generation of the Dagars is represented by New Delhi’s Wasifuddin Dagar. |
Everything is swinging: heaven, earth, water, fire, and the secret one slowly growing a body. I saw that for fifteen seconds and it made me a servant for life. — Kabir This wise King does not seek war. He seeks first to converse, to dialogue, to parley. For a war destroys more than the king. It also decimates the hapless population, the cattle and the fields full of grain. — The Mahabharata  |
| 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 | |
PROF C.N.R. Rao is a familiar name in the national and international circles. Having been associated with scientific research for almost half a century, he is, doubtless, of Nobel Prize mettle. He is as tall in the field of science as Nobel laureate C.V. Raman had been in 1920s. But luck eluded him; he missed the Nobel narrowly. Prof Rao’s work has, however, been recognised by the Tel Aviv University of Israel which conferred on him one million dollar Dan David Prize. Standards for bestowing the Israeli Award are known to be very high, even more stringent than the selection of Nobel Prize nominees. Honouring an Indian after a long gap since C.V. Raman got the Nobel Prize in 1930 is indeed a leap forward in the sphere of science. Compare the scientific research 75 years back when Raman caught the eye of the Nobel selection committee with the pace of research in India in 2005 when Prof Rao got the Dan David award. 
SO another good man gone. I had met Sunil Dutt thrice, the last was a few months back. Though each time it was an interview-related interaction, his personal life did crop up. He had lived with photographs of his family and