O P I N I O N S

EDITORIALS

No confrontation, please!
Both Parliament and judiciary have to protect Constitution
The Supreme Court’s decision to refer the matter of expulsion of 11 MPs to a Constitution Bench may trigger an avoidable confrontation between Parliament and the judiciary.

More teachers for Punjab
Merit should be sole consideration
There has never been any doubt that Punjab needs more teachers, even as there have been reports of many rural schools that have instructors on their rolls, but no one to impart education to the students.

Fair victory
Lowering the bar for women
If the spirit is willing the flesh can overcome any challenge. This is borne out by two sdwomen graduates in hotel management, among others, successfully suing to win the right for the female of the species to work as bartenders.

• Thought for the day

Musharraf’s demilitarisation balloon
A prisoner of his own rhetoric
by Gen V.P. Malik (retd)
Disappointed at the lack of progress in resolving the Kashmir issue through the Indo-Pak composite dialogue, Gen Pervez Musharraf is reported to have said, “Let me give another bombshell, I propose, one way of moving forward.... Take three towns, Srinagar, Kupwara and Baramula.

MIDDLE

Cigar smoke
by Rajnish Wattas
Big B’s Big C (cigar) seems to have lit many fires in Goa. The news that an NGO is fuming at the hoarding of the film Family, depicting Amitabh Bachchan smoking a cigar, is surely to become a burning issue with conservative families and the
anti-smoking lobby, despite the regrets expressed by the actor.

OPED

Lawyers’ strike
No one has a right to obstruct justice: Delhi HC Document
The Delhi High Court met on January 10 to consider the situation created by the striking lawyers of the Delhi Bar Association. The following are excerpts from a resolution passed by the full court.

Good press is a legitimate weapon
by Michael Schrage
Precision-guided munitions and night vision are terrific military technologies, and no one would deny them to our soldiers in Iraq. But as much as it needs innovative equipment, any army that’s serious about winning a war needs innovative media.

US strike damages Musharraf’s image
by James Rupert
Friday’s U.S. airstrike on a Pakistani village has disrupted America’s efforts to improve its image in this country, one of its most important Muslim allies, and has turned glaring publicity on a part of the “global war on terror” that the United States and Pakistan have tried to keep hidden.

From the pages of

REFLECTIONS

EDITORIALS

No confrontation, please!
Both Parliament and judiciary have to protect Constitution

The Supreme Court’s decision to refer the matter of expulsion of 11 MPs to a
Constitution Bench may trigger an avoidable confrontation between Parliament and the judiciary. It comes close on the heels of Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee’s decision not to reply to the notices that the Delhi High Court sent to him after eight of the expelled 11 MPs filed a petition. Though the Bench consisting of Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice C.K. Thakkar and Justice R.V. Raveendran said that it was not concerned about the merits of the case, it wants the Constitution Bench to examine the “important question” of the MPs’ powers and privileges under Article 105 of the Constitution. Specifically, the apex court wants an examination of the Lok Sabha’s power to expel its members.

The balance of power between the three pillars of the Constitution — the legislature, the executive and the judiciary — is so delicate that whenever the Supreme Court seeks to examine the constitutionality of a legislative action, the presiding officers and the representatives claim supremacy for Parliament. The actual position, however, is that as Parliament and the Supreme Court are both creatures of the Constitution, it is the Constitution that is ultimately sovereign and supreme. Of course, the Supreme Court is the final interpreter of the Constitution. Its power of quashing a piece of legislation if Parliament transgresses the provisions of the Constitution is a case in point.

On the specific question of expulsions, it would, however, be difficult to take a stand contrary to what Parliament has done after the two sting operations shook the conscience of Parliament and the country. The overwhelming national response in favour of expulsions proves that Parliament, as the chief repository of people’s will, has done its onerous duty firmly and boldly by expelling the tainted MPs. The Constitution Bench may have the power to examine Article 105, but this should not lead to a fresh confrontation with Parliament. Parliament and the judiciary are the two most important pillars of the Constitution and both will hopefully have the wisdom to maintain the fine balance of power as envisaged by the founding fathers. The people are not ready for any wing of the polity to upset the present scheme of things.

More teachers for Punjab
Merit should be sole consideration

There has never been any doubt that Punjab needs more teachers, even as there have been reports of many rural schools that have instructors on their rolls, but no one to impart education to the students. The Chief Minister’s announcement that the state would recruit 12,000 teachers is welcome, even if there is a whiff of pre-election populism in it. The Chief Minister has promised that posts would be filled strictly in accordance with merit and in a transparent manner. This must not only be so, but also appear to be so. Involving the Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs) in the recruitment is a good step, but there should be no extraneous considerations in this exercise.

It would not be an exaggeration to state that the future of any society is in the hands of its teachers, who shape the lives and careers of students. Unfortunately, the standard of education in government schools in general and rural government schools in particular, has been pathetic, and there have even been cases where teachers have hired proxies to take their classes. Moreover, the rate of absenteeism is abysmal. Thus, hiring and monitoring have to go hand in hand to ensure proper functioning of the government schools. That these jobs will be non-transferable would ensure their continuing presence in rural schools.

The announcement says that the teachers for primary schools will be hired on a contract basis. This would be a good starting point to ensure that their future is linked to their performance. The government must lay down clear guidelines about what it expects from the teachers, and there should be a transparent mechanism to ensure that they are rewarded for good work done, and punished for non-performance. Teachers must teach, and show good results. They owe it to the students.

Fair victory
Lowering the bar for women

If the spirit is willing the flesh can overcome any challenge. This is borne out by two
women graduates in hotel management, among others, successfully suing to win the right for the female of the species to work as bartenders. That’s one more blow for women’s rights, which even the most chauvinist of men – though for the wrong reasons – would welcome. While the male bar fly may now entertain visions of lovely lasses serving cocktails that shake and stir the hazy atmosphere, the Delhi High Court ruling makes a fundamental point of far-reaching importance.

In fact, it is surprising that no one woke up earlier to this discriminatory provision in the Punjab Excise Act that prohibits women from serving liquor in the hospitality industry. The court has ruled that this restriction — applicable under the Act to Punjab, Delhi and Haryana — is “unconstitutional” and violates the Articles on fundamental rights. So, it is just as well that the provision has been struck down, thereby preventing the denial of legitimate job opportunities for women.

This is a progressive development, though it may raise the hackles of those with a moral policing mindset, which led to the closure of dance bars in Mumbai; and rendered thousands of women jobless because of the perverse perception of their work. If there are forces opposed to women taking up jobs that a male-driven society considers “inappropriate”, there are also those who exploit women for unscrupulous profit. The court’s note of caution that the industry cannot force women to serve alcohol against their wishes should serve as a warning. Essentially, it is as much about a woman’s right to employment as her right to choose her work. Both the letter and the spirit of the law have to be upheld by employers.

Thought for the day

You cannot argue with someone who denies the first principles. — Auctoritates Aristotelis

ARTICLE

Musharraf’s demilitarisation balloon
A prisoner of his own rhetoric
by Gen V.P. Malik (retd)

Disappointed at the lack of progress in resolving the Kashmir issue through the Indo-Pak composite dialogue, Gen Pervez Musharraf is reported to have said, “Let me give another bombshell, I propose, one way of moving forward.... Take three towns, Srinagar, Kupwara and Baramula. Let all the military move out of the cities to the outskirts. (We) will ensure there is no militancy inside.... Pakistan will be with the Indian government and Kashmiris to ensure that there will be total peace and tranquility in these three places.”

Within hours of this so-called bombshell, the Government of India reacted coldly and shot down the suggestion stating that such a decision could not be dictated by any foreign government. It was a bad omen for the start of the third round of the composite dialogue process on January 16.

Actually, there is nothing new in General Musharraf’s suggestion. Therefore, it is not such a bombshell. But the statement conveys complicity, naivety, and deliberate interference in the internal affairs of a foreign country; things that are carefully avoided in practising international relations by mature statesmen and nations.

Not many people in India may be aware that we had implemented such a move in 1997-98. It produced no results because the ISI and its terrorist outfits exploited the situation. Later, the Pakistan Army intruded into Kargil sector, which led to a limited war in 1999.

After the state and parliamentary elections in 1996-97, people in the Kashmir valley showed considerable enthusiasm, fresh hopes and clear signs of disenchantment with militancy. In order to strengthen the hands of the elected state government, we (I was Army Chief then) removed Army deployments from Baramula, Sopore, Srinagar, Badgam and Anantnag towns. Only paramilitary troops were deployed in these towns to assist the civil authorities and the police in maintaining law and order.

For some time terrorism in the valley appeared contained. But this was not to the liking of the ISI and its terrorist outfits. They extended terrorist activities to Kishtwar, Doda and other areas south of Pir Panjal Range. Among the infiltrators, the number of foreign terrorists shot up suddenly. They took over control of the local militants. At one stage, terrorists took control of Sopore town. Army units had to be re-deployed to bring about normalcy in that town.

When the Lahore Declaration was signed, violence erupted all over in Jammu and Kashmir. Between February and April 1999, there were 618 incidents of violence in which 487 civilian, security forces personnel and terrorists were killed. Thereafter, because of the Pakistan Army’s intrusion in Kargil, our regular Army units and their formation headquarters (8 Mountain Division) were moved to Dras. Rashtriya Rifle units were deployed in their place in the valley.

The General’s suggestion is also not a bombshell because only a few months ago Pakistan’s ambassador in the US, Gen Jehangir Karamat, had spoken similarly of demilitarisation of Baramulah and Kupwara districts. The strategic and military implications and the risks involved in such a move are quite obvious. It would facilitate infiltration on the most usable routes, and some day may even facilitate Pakistan’s influence/domination/control of Shamsabari Range and areas north of Jhelum, including the three cities; virtually more than half the valley.

How will the Pakistan President ensure total peace and tranquility in Baramulah, Kupwara and Srinagar after our military units move out? Doesn’t that reflect Pakistani command and control over terrorists operating in Jammu and Kashmir?

I am surprised at the naivety of the suggestion. Does he really expect India to ask those very elements that sponsored cross-border terrorism to pull its chestnuts out of the fire now?

The General is loudly speaking against “autonomy” and promoting “self-rule” outside the Indian constitution in Jammu and Kashmir. Does the “self-rule” apply to PoK and Northern areas, where there are no elected representatives? It is surprising that the Government of India has not reacted strongly to this blatant interference in its internal affairs which sabotages the Indian government’s efforts in domestic political dialogue, in working out details of autonomy in the state (a task assigned to Mr N.N. Vohra, former Defence and Home Secretary). It may release centrifugal forces that can cause more trouble for India.

Analysts wonder whether India has given up political claim to Jammu and Kashmir on the other side of the LoC. Lack of that articulation is obviously making General Musharraf bolder and his task easier by focusing on Jammu and Kashmir on the Indian side of the LoC.

Why is President Musharraf so impatient that he keeps floating new balloons on Jammu and Kashmir every few days?

He has three constituencies: himself, Pakistan military and the articulate Pakistani liberal elite. Personally, he needs legitimacy to be able to continue as President after shedding his uniform. For this, he has to deliver on the domestic and India front. On the domestic front, he needs plural support, economic progress, and social stability. Having created a fairly stable PML (Q) and nominating an economic technocrat as Prime Minister who is managing the economy well, his performance on the domestic front has been fairly satisfactory. Post-9/11 strategic cooperation with the US, particularly for Operation Enduring Freedom, has benefited Pakistan (and thus him) in financial resources and as a “Major Non-NATO Ally”.

On the India front, he needs a breakthrough in the composite dialogue, particularly on Kashmir. But he is unable to change the Indo-phobic mindset of the Pakistan military, which traditionally looks at the threat and competition from India as a justification for its own relevance and primacy. He cannot afford to upset this establishment and, therefore, cannot or does not wish to eschew support to the Kashmiri terrorism. He wants to please the Pakistani liberal elite to be able to get its support, retain power and to maintain his own liberal image.

General Musharraf is also a prisoner of his own rhetoric. As the time for shedding uniform is running out, he is under pressure to deliver. But if he continues to drive the Jammu and Kashmir agenda in this manner and tries to use it as a benchmark for all discussions, the Indo-Pak composite dialogue is unlikely to see substantive progress in the near future.

The writer, a former Chief of Army Staff, is currently President, ORF Institute of Security Studies, New Delhi.

MIDDLE

Cigar smoke
by Rajnish Wattas

Big B’s Big C (cigar) seems to have lit many fires in Goa. The news that an NGO is fuming at the hoarding of the film Family, depicting Amitabh Bachchan smoking a cigar, is surely to become a burning issue with conservative families and the anti-smoking lobby, despite the regrets expressed by the actor. It will also make the Health Ministry mandarins smoulder with rage.

But this perhaps may delight the “cigarati” — followers of cigar cult — and the congnoscenti for re-igniting the passions of the powerful and the Page 3 set. “Cigar Cool” is the style icon of the rich and the famous; ranging from Bill Clinton, Madonna to Tom Cruise. And historically, of course, famous personalities like Winston Churchill, Alfred Hitchcock and Fidel Castro made their “burning desire”, a hallmark of their persona.

I got my first taste of a cigar high some time back, at a high society, jet-set party, thrown by my mini tycoon nephew. As single malts mixed with martinis and the glitterati gelled with the chatterati, at the pool side of a classy resort, a box of expensive Monte Cristo cigars was circulated.

As an occasional “after-dinner” cigarette smoker, I was tempted to savour the Havana highs and make my own fashion statement. I was initiated into the “rites of passage” of cigar smoking by a connoisseur. The tapered end had to be opened artfully with an expensive “Tiffany cutter” and the cigar lit up only with a Butane gas lighter or matches — so as not to affect its natural aroma. And one needed a humidor to keep one’s stock of cigars fresh.

As I puffed at the six inches long, fat, sensuous Cuban cigar; it was strong and full bodied! I imagined myself wearing a tuxedo, chewing a cigar and enjoying an after-dinner cognac in an exclusive Manhattan cigar bar — looking really “Cigar Cool”. However, all such fantasies went up in smoke, when I checked the price. A single cigar nearly equalled the cost of my pants. I choked with this realisation and stubbed out the cigar before I lost my shirt — and secretly pocketed, the expensive unfinished, cigar for future performance.

My son, recently flushed with his first student earnings — made from a summer internship — presented me a Romeo Y Julieta cigar on my last birthday. It is still lying untouched. It takes a braveheart to see the equivalent of a few hundred rupees go up in smoke in minutes. Perhaps for me, cigar smoking is going to be all smoke and no fire. Or, even better, I stick to the good old beerhis!

OPED

Lawyers’ strike
No one has a right to obstruct justice: Delhi HC Document

The Delhi High Court met on January 10 to consider the situation created by the striking lawyers of the Delhi Bar Association. The following are excerpts from a resolution passed by the full court:

A Section of the lawyers at Tis Hazari Court, Delhi, have been on strike since 2.1.2006 against the creation of the Rohini Court, Delhi. On 4.1.2006 these lawyers went to the Supreme Court of India and shouted abusive slogans against the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, the Hon’ble Chief Justice, Delhi High Court, and others. On 6.1.2006 at the inauguration of the Rohini Court, they again went to Rohini Court and shouted abusive slogans and created a nuisance. Thereafter, they have been obstructing the working of Tis Hazari and the Rohini Court.

These lawyers have been committing violence as is evident from the reports received from the Distt. Judge, Tis Hazari and the Judge in charge of Rohini Court, Delhi. They beat up other lawyers who wanted to work, and pulled them out of the court when these lawyers wanted to enter the court rooms to argue their cases.

This strike is causing great hardship to the litigant public whose urgent applications such as bail, injunction applications, cannot be heard because of the strike.

Litigants/witnesses etc come from distant places at heavy expenses. They are being told that their cases cannot be taken up due to the strike. This is most unfair to the litigant public.

No one can be allowed to hold the judiciary at ransom. The court cannot standby and see the institution paralysed indefinitely.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the lawyers’ strikes are illegal and that effective steps should be taken to stop the growing tendency.

The courts are under no obligation to adjourn matters because lawyers are on strike. On the contrary, it is the duty of all courts to go on with matters on their boards even in the absence of lawyers. In other words, courts must not be privy to strikes or calls for boycotts.

The judiciary is accountable to the public. The dispensation of justice must not stop for any reason. The strikes by lawyers have lowered the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the general public.

In Manoj Kumar vs. Civil Judge, Deoria (Writ Petition No. 33778 of 1997 decided on 10.10.1997) a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court observed. “Before parting with this case, we would like to mention that it is deeply regrettable and highly objectionable that there are strikes in District Courts in U.P. on flimsy and frivolous pretexts, and some District Courts function only for about 60 or 70 days in a year. This is a shocking state of affairs, and will no longer be tolerated by this court.

“The judiciary and the Bar are both accountable to the public and they must behave in a responsible manner so that cases are decided quickly and thus the faith of the public in the judiciary is maintained. Surely, the public has a right to expect this from us. We, therefore, issue a general mandamus to all the judicial officers in all District Courts in U.P. that if the lawyers go on strike the judicial officers must, dispute the strike of lawyers, sit in court and pass orders in cases before them even in the absence of the counsels.”

No one has a right to obstruct the administration of justice. An extraordinary situation demands extraordinary measures to be taken. Where the fundamental rights of the citizens are being grossly violated, the High Court as a guardian of Subordinate Courts and as a protector of rights of the citizens, would not sit quiet and allow the situation to deteriorate.

It is absolutely necessary that very strong measures should be taken to stop the growing tendency of lawyers’ strikes. The court now feels that the time has come to take immediate effective and strong steps, to remedy the situation and, therefore, the court has resolved that in order to curb the tendencies of strikes by lawyers following steps/measures be taken:

1. The Subordinate Courts shall not take cognizance of any resolution passed by the Bar Association to strike, and to stop judicial work. The District Judge concerned shall not entertain or circulate any such resolutions amongst the judicial officers in his judgeship. The judges shall sit in court during court hours and shall pass orders in the cases listed before them, whether the lawyers are present or not.

2. The judicial officers must strictly adhere to court hours. They shall perform the entire judicial work on the dais, and shall not accept any request to rise, or to stop judicial work on the request of lawyers or litigants.

In case lawyers do not attend to work the judicial officers shall proceed to work in the following manner:-

(A) Where the parties are willing they shall be heard personally and necessary orders shall be passed in case requiring no further evidence.

(B) In matters fixed for evidence parties shall be allowed to file documents and do examinations/cross examinations of witnesses, if they so desire.

(C) In all matters including suits, revisions, review, appeals (Civil and Criminal both), bails, urgent applications, etc appropriate orders should be passed by the Judge even in absence of lawyers. Such an order can also be an order dismissing the case for a default if legally permissible.

Good press is a legitimate weapon
by Michael Schrage

Precision-guided munitions and night vision are terrific military technologies, and no one would deny them to our soldiers in Iraq. But as much as it needs innovative equipment, any army that’s serious about winning a war needs innovative media. As one of the most successful warriors in Middle East history wrote: “The printing press is the greatest weapon in the armory of the modern commander.”

This pillar of wisdom from the great British military strategist T. E. Lawrence—better known as Lawrence of Arabia—remains as compelling today as it was when he penned it in 1920, after helping engineer a victorious Arab revolt against the Ottomans. Yet revelations that U.S. forces in Iraq have surreptitiously purchased and placed stories in the local media to promote the quality-of-life improvements they have made possible and to highlight the country’s democratic progress have provoked journalistic outrage here at home. Newspaper editorials have condemned the classified “information operations” program. A White House spokesman has said that President Bush is “deeply concerned.” Most journalists I know have reacted with cynical disgust. “This time, someone really does have to be fired,” wrote Christopher Hitchens, who otherwise supports the war effort, in Slate.

Enough, already. The truth is, you can’t wage a successful counterinsurgency campaign without an “information warfare” component. An occupying force can’t effectively “stand up” local police and military forces without positively influencing the media that their friends and family see and hear, according to Lt. Col. John Nagl’s highly regarded counterinsurgency manual, “Learning to Eat Soup With a Knife,” which he revised after serving in the Sunni Triangle. Securing positive coverage for our troops in Iraq can be as important to their safety as “up-armoring” vehicles and providing state-of-the-art body armor. The failure to wage the media war is a failure to command.

Unfortunately, our forces have been relearning Lawrence’s fundamental lesson the hard way. American commanders quietly admit they were slow to grasp its significance in the insurgency’s early days. “The information environment is very much a contributing factor to how the U.S. forces and multinational forces are accepted in this emerging democracy,” asserted Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, director of the Coalition Press Information Center, in a telephone interview from Baghdad. “It is a direct threat to the troops if we don’t participate in this information environment. That’s why there’s been a lot of emotion behind this (initiative).”

The now-controversial “information ops” were launched as a defensive measure. The U.S. military was seeking to counter the insurgents’ successful efforts to both spread untrue stories about coalition activities and to physically attack pro-American Iraqi media, said Johnson. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, more than 40 Iraqi journalists have been killed since the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Last September, a reporter and an editor for the pro-democracy Iraqi newspaper As-Saffir were gunned down within days of each other. Death threats against journalists remain common. Coalition forces weren’t losing a war of “ideas,” they were losing an uncontested guerrilla conflict over media access.

As local media friendlies were being assaulted, U.S. military lawyers and commanders considered shutting down or blowing up hostile media outlets, but deemed these tactics to be either illegal or counterproductive. — LA Times-Washington Post

US strike damages Musharraf’s image
by James Rupert

Friday’s U.S. airstrike on a Pakistani village has disrupted America’s efforts to improve its image in this country, one of its most important Muslim allies, and has turned glaring publicity on a part of the “global war on terror” that the United States and Pakistan have tried to keep hidden. In both ways, it has weakened one of Washington’s main backers in the Muslim world, President Pervez Musharraf.

Since October’s earthquake here, both governments have played up the role of U.S. troops and helicopters in rushing relief supplies to millions of homeless villagers in the mountains of Kashmir. That imagery has helped counter a three-year wave of public relations disasters for the United States in Pakistan and the Muslim world, including the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the abuse and humiliation of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and other military prisons abroad.

But since Saturday, positive images of American relief work have been swept aside here by pictures and stories about the U.S. missile attack that killed between 13 and 18 Pakistanis in an attempt to hit al-Qaida leaders in a village near the border with Afghanistan.

“American soldiers have been acting as brothers to Pakistanis, and we are all happy about this,” said Hussain Javed, a Pakistani businessman who was taking a flight Sunday at Islamabad’s airport. “But now they are killing us, too, and so maybe they are our enemies instead.”

Thousands of Pakistanis marched Sunday in protest of the attack, and Islamic militant leaders vowed Monday to keep the demonstrations going. While Pakistani political analysts do not suggest the protests are likely to threaten Musharraf’s control, Javed and others say a recent string of U.S. border incursions strengthens a popular image of him as a lapdog of the unpopular U.S. superpower.

While the CIA has played a major role in the 4-year-old manhunt for al-Qaida militants in Pakistan’s unruly tribal borderlands with Afghanistan, Washington and Islamabad have kept that fact as quiet as possible to protect Musharraf from popular disapproval, U.S. and Pakistani officials have said. Musharraf’s government has insisted that, as a sovereign nation, Pakistan is conducting the chase with its own troops and only technical assistance from U.S. intelligence.

Since November that claim has been eroded by four U.S. air raids on Pakistani villages that have been increasingly difficult to conceal from the public.

Not that Pakistan’s government didn’t try. On the night of Nov. 30, explosions demolished a home in Asoray, a village in North Waziristan, killing a senior al-Qaida figure, Hamza Rabia. Residents told Pakistani journalists of hearing aircraft overhead and several explosions, and they displayed rocket fragments with U.S. markings. U.S. news agencies quoted unnamed American intelligence officials in Washington as saying the CIA had gotten Rabia with a missile strike.

National security adviser Stephen Hadley sidestepped the question of the CIA’s role, saying, “Musharraf has been very aggressive in dealing with al-Qaida and the Taliban,” and “we have helped him in terms of providing intelligence and cooperating with his forces.”

Pakistani officials denied that any attack had taken place, saying Rabia and his colleagues had accidentally exploded a bomb in the house. A local journalist, Hayatullah Khan, challenged the official version. A few days later, he was abducted by masked gunmen and has not been heard of since.

Officials in Northern Waziristan offered the same explanation — an explosion of a bomb under construction — for another blast that destroyed a house Rabia had been staying in two weeks earlier.

—LA Times-Washington Post

From the pages of

Burma oil rights

Replying to Sir Henry Craik in regard to the alleged proclamation signed by Queen Victoria and Lord Salisbury as Secretary of State for India in 1884 and the concession to the Burma Oil Company, Mr Ronald McNeill pointed out that Lord Salisbury ceased to be Secretary for India six years earlier, and the language of the documents showed that they were obvious forgeries. The United States Government was informed in 1921, but no official admission was made till last year.

The use of the forged documents in the recent official report to the Senate and the decision to apply for an oil lease by the late Secretary of State for the Interior had caused the Government to make further representations to the United States. It was not clear from the Government information whether the documents originated in the Bureau of Mines in 1919 or the US Consulate in Bombay.

REFLECTIONS

The immortal cannot be reached by mundane stairways.

— The Upanishads

Do not be so vain looking at your high mansion. After death, you’ll be lying on bare land on which mere grass will grow.

— Kabir

“We have oppressed ourselves”. Humanity alienates itself from its source through the delusive action of its own obsessive self-absorption.

— Islam

Work hard. Work well. And be happy with the results that you get. Do not aspire for a particular result and be upset when you do not get it. This is the essence of karma yoga.

— Bhagvad Gita