 |
|
SEZs on hold Get real on reality show |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Buchwald’s Art
Verdict on Ninth Schedule
Visual attacks
Sabharwal’s judgements affirmed supremacy of Constitution When desi fashion wowed Paris Inside Pakistan
|
SEZs on hold THE reported direction from the Prime Minister’s Office, putting on hold the special economic zones, has put a question mark on the fate of 163 SEZs, which have been cleared, but not notified. Confusion and protests over SEZs could have been avoided had the Centre and the states jointly formulated clear-cut guidelines on how to acquire land and compensate the displaced farmers. First, Congress president Sonia Gandhi unilaterally declared that SEZs should not come up on fertile land. Then the Prime Minister clarified that in states like Punjab, where there was no barren land, SEZs could come up even on cultivable land. Policies are not announced in bits and pieces. The real cause of farmers’ protests in various states, however, is the pricing of land and the government role in forcibly acquiring it for the benefit of industrialists. The Land Acquisition Act empowers the government to forcibly take possession of land only for some public good like constructing roads, schools and hospitals. The taking over of land for promoting a cluster of industries obviously does not fall in this category. There are cases where prices shot up after land in a particular village has been acquired. This has led the owners to cry foul and demand higher prices before parting with their land. The fiery protests at Nandigram in West Bengal have forced the Congress to reconsider ways to avoid a similar backlash elsewhere, particularly in the states going to the polls next month. Though the protesters accuse the CPM-led government of siding with the industrialists, it firmly supports SEZs — one area in which it is in agreement with the Centre. The empowered group of ministers, which will meet on January 22, is expected to reconsider the SEZ policy, which, media reports indicate, may put a cap on the number of SEZs in a sector. Right compensation and rehabilitation of farmers who stand to lose the only source of their livelihood, however, will have to be on top of the agenda. |
|
Get real on reality show SHILPA SHETTY’S denial that there was any racial discrimination against her in the British TV programme “Celebrity Big Brother” has knocked the bottom out of the protests that were raging from England to India, but it still needs to be said that this was nothing more than a silly storm in a teacup. A British reality show tailor-made to bring out the worst in its participants does not represent British reality in any way. Nor is Shilpa Shetty a representative of a billion-plus Indians. She had agreed to take part in the programme with her eyes and ears wide open and had pocketed a fee running into crores of rupees for this ordeal. Arguments amongst contestants are part of such shows in which a number of people live for a few days constantly in front of TV cameras. It would have been understandable if Indians living in the UK were worked up over certain disparaging comments passed against her. But there was no justification for the Indian External Affairs Ministry to jump into the fray. So much hue and cry was raised over nothing in England as well, with the matter coming up in Parliament there too. Besides raking up non-issues, such controversies steal attention away from more pressing problems. Surely, this is not the kind of matter on which British Prime Minister Tony Blair, his successor-in-waiting Gordon Brown, Indian minister Anand Sharma and BJP’s spokesman Prakash Javedkar should be holding forth. Nor should a jibe against an Indian puncture the balloon of national pride of everyone. That also brings one to the question of desirability of such meaningless programmes. They peddle inanities in the name of reality. It is common knowledge that while minor celebrities are incarcerated in a house and garden together, where they are voted off one by one by TV viewers, they don’t really do everything extempore. Many a time, they go according to script. Even when they are actually on their own, their reactions and over-reactions are hardly worth losing one’s sleep and peace. The only gainer in all this is broadcaster Channel Four, whose rating has gone soaring. What a pity that Indian TV channels too are aping such programmes! |
|
Buchwald’s Art IN a bleak world where bad news is news, Art Buchwald’s column gave millions of newspaper readers across the world a reason to smile. Without doubt, he was the humorist best known to and most read by at least two generations during his more than 50 writing years. His mocking satire was gentle, totally bereft of malice. His column didn’t send the reader into peals of laughter but brought forth a smile leading to reflection about the lighter side of even the most serious political issue. He delighted in unsparing potshots at the establishment and some of the world’s most powerful personalities but it was always what could be described as ‘ribbing’, not ripping apart. Buchwald’s syndicated humour column was carried by hundreds of newspapers, and not just in the US, Europe and India. It is estimated that at the height of its popularity, the column appeared in more than 500 newspapers across the world. The rich, the famous and the powerful, who squirmed when they were made the butt of his humour, were also said to be flattered at being picked for the privilege by the legendary columnist, who published more than 30 books. His last book, Too Soon to Say Goodbye, is perhaps the most remarkable result of equally remarkable circumstances. Last year, when doctors told him that he had only a few weeks to live because of his failing kidneys, he moved into a hospice. As Buchwald said, “For reasons that even the doctors can’t explain, my kidneys kept working.” So he kept writing, his humour undiminished by imminent death and published the book, proving that he was truly funny both as a writer and person. Who else could have kept churning out his humour column, and laughed at the world and with his friends knowing that uncertainties can defy even certain death? |
|
It is a wise father that knows his own child.
— William Shakespeare |
Verdict on Ninth Schedule STRANGE and varied are the influences on constitutional decision-making. If Mrs Indira Gandhi had not lost the election petition filed against her in the Allahabad High Court in June 1975……, and if Justice Khanna was not a member of the Constitution Bench (of five Judges) that decided her election appeal in the Supreme Court; (where he explained what he meant to say in his earlier judgment in Keshavananda Bharati) then, none of the Fundamental Rights would have been regarded as part of the Constitution’s “basic or essential features”, with the result that Parliamentary or state enactments placed in the Ninth Schedule (by Constitutional Amendments) after April 1973 would have been immunised from scrutiny by courts. Let me explain. Under the Constitution of India 1950, courts are empowered to invalidate legislative enactments and executive orders which violate any one or more of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Part-III of the Constitution (Part-III is our Bill of Rights). But the Constitution is silent on the question as to whether courts are empowered to adjudicate on the validity of constitutional amendments. With one single political party almost consistently returned to power with a two-thirds majority at each general election since 1951, the judges of the past had plumbed the depths of silence in one of the world’s longest Constitutions, searching for some limitation on the amending power. They attempted to find it – unsuccessfully, as it later turned out – in Golaknath (1967) where a Bench of 11 Justices held by a narrow majority (6:5) that constitutional amendments were “laws” under Article 13 and as such subject to the mandate of that article viz. that Parliament or State Legislatures could not abridge or take away fundamental rights by enacting laws whether in exercise of legislative powers or in exercise of constituent powers. The next attempt – nearly successful but not quite – was in Keshavananda Bharati (April 1973) wherein a full Bench of 13 Justices, a narrow majority of the court (7:6) held – overruling Golaknath – that though all the provisions of the Constitution, including fundamental rights, were amendable, certain “basic and essential features” of the Constitution (left undefined – but which included features like secularism, rule of law, independence of the judiciary) could never be amended or abrogated: whether any of the Fundamental Rights could be characterised as part of the basic and essential features of the Constitution was left undecided, one of the Justices comprising the majority (Justice H.R. Khanna) holding that the right to property could in no event be a basic or essential feature. The first application of the conclusion (lawyers call it “the ratio”) of the decision in Keshavananda Bharati came in the case of Raj Narain vs. Indira Gandhi (1975) where a Bench of five Justices sat to determine the validity of the Constitution Thirty-ninth Amendment Act 1975 which attempted to validate the election of Mrs. Gandhi to the Lok Sabha (the Allahabad High Court having invalidated and set aside her election). The Judges in that five-Judge Bench were those who had sat, deliberated and decided Keshavananda Bharati: and four out of these five Justices had been in the minority in Keshavananda Bharati, having there decided that there were no restrictions whatever on Parliament in exercise of its constituent powers to take away or abridge any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights; yet accepting the discipline of the binding majority judgment in Keshavananda Bharati, all of them struck down (in Raj Narain vs. Indira Gandhi) some of the provisions of the Constitution Thirty-ninth Amendment Act as violating “the basic structure” of the Constitution. It so happened that Justice H.R. Khanna was also a member of that Bench; which gave that Judge the opportunity to say that his judgment in Keshavananda Bharati had been misinterpreted to mean that in his view none of the fundamental rights was part of the basic or essential features of the Constitution. Khanna said that: he only meant to say that the right to property (Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31) was never part of the basic or essential feature of the Constitution. It was this clarification that paved the way for later decisions of the Supreme Court – Bench decisions of five Justices – in Waman Rao (1980) and Minerva Mills (1980) – which still left undecided the question as to whether any particular Fundamental Right, was a basic or essential feature of the Constitution which could not be taken away even in respect of Parliamentary or State enactments placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 1973: it was this great question that occasioned the reference (in 1999) to a larger Bench of Nine Justices – which ultimately heard the reference (in October 2006) and handed down its decision on January 11, 2007. As to what the Judges have decided in the unanimous judgment of the Nine Judge Bench will be debated by lawyers (and politicians) over the months, and years. To me the judgment establishes the pre-eminence of judicial review of each and every part of our Constitution. Since Parliament is presumed to legislate in conformity with Fundamental Rights (says the Nine Judge Bench), the basic–structure–doctrine requires the State to justify the degree of invasion of Fundamental Rights in every given case: and this is where the court’s power of judicial review comes in. The greater the invasion into essential freedoms (mentioned for the first time in the judgment as being contained in Articles 14, 19 and 21) the greater the need for justification and determination by the Supreme Court whether such invasion was or is necessary, and if so to what extent. The degree of invasion is always for the highest court to determine – not for any other body or institution. The power to grant immunity to Acts placed in the Ninth Schedule on some fictional basis (as provided in Article 31B) without a full judicial review “will nullify the entire basic structure doctrine.” Thus spoke the court. The paramountcy of judicial review was enunciated in colourful terms (though in a somewhat different context) by a great English commercial Judge. In the nineteen-thirties, Lord Justice Scrutton famously said that “there must be no Alsatia in England where the King’s writ does not run.” (“Alsatia” was then a debatable piece of territory between France and Germany). The clear message handed down in the judgment of the Nine Judge Bench in the Ninth Schedule case is that there must be no Alsatia in India where the writ of the Supreme Court does not
run.
|
Visual attacks
IN these days of entertainment television and one-upmanship, and hence constant onslaught of news, views, exclusives, flashes, breaking news and invasion into peoples’ lives through incalculable news channels, there are times when one cannot help but feel somewhat warmed up towards these 24 x 7 hours aggressions on the small screen. Amidst the madness of a Prince trapped in a tunnel, a Patna professor two-timing his wife, Rakhi Sawant raising hell over a kiss, Ash and Abhishek’s engagement becoming the lead news and a TV journo asking the distraught brother of a dead man as to how he plans to celebrate his dead brother’s birthday, in most recent times when I felt obliged towards TV channels was after the Jessica Lal and Priyadarshini Matoo cases. And on personal front, it was on the occasion of Makara Sankranti on January 14 that I felt like thanking a news channel the most. Very resourcefully, an English news channel had set its OB van at the Sabrimala temple in Kerala, treating viewers to something that most of us in the North must have been witness to for the first time in their lives — the Makara jyoti. For someone like me, born and bred in this part of the country, the appearance of the miraculous jyoti on the hills near the temple was nothing short of the most incredible experience. Largely because, A—I was not aware of any such happening at Sabrimala for which lakhs of people from Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu gather at the temple on the auspicious day every year. And B — even if I had been, I would never been able to gather the will or the determination to travel thousands of kilometres to witness the miraculous event of faith in person. Another effort that managed to warm up the core of my heart has been to be able to watch the groovy Imran Khan every other day — immaculately dressed and perched on a stool in a TV studio, expressing his views on the favourite pastime of the subcontinent — cricket — in his deep voice. Wow. Now for someone like me, not-so-young-anymore, not too fond of cricket, and therefore not caring much on what commentators and experts have to say about the game at the end of the day, watching the ultimately sexy Khan, clad in the ultimately immaculate three-piece suit, and speaking the ultimately cultured English becomes the most ultimate treat. I really don’t care what the man has to say about the game or those who play it, but just watching the groovy Khan in colour on my 29-inch idiot box transports me back to the time when as a young girl I would fantasise about the fantastically handsome sports superstar. Those were the days when cricketers used to be sportsmen and not entertainers. And as far as I am concerned, any number of M.S. Dhonis and Shahid Afridis put together cannot create the magic of one Imran Khan. Unfortunately, God does not seem to be creating such sublimely superb packages anymore. But thank God he created these 24x7 visual
attacks. |
Sabharwal’s judgements affirmed supremacy of Constitution Justice Sabharwal began his career in the judiciary as a judge of the Delhi High Court in 1986 and he never dreamt that one day he will occupy the chair of CJI. He had thought he would retire from the high court and start his practice as a lawyer again. Once destiny brought him into the chair of the head of the country’s judiciary, he measured up to it and enforced the rule of law in the best possible way. In his own words, once a person occupies such a high position, it is immaterial if he earns the ire of his close friends, relatives and some section of the people, in the process of fulfilling his Constitutional duty, as had happened to him on the issue of sealing of illegal commercial ventures in the capital. Some of his relatives had even stopped talking to him and the affected traders accused him of showing no compassion to humanitarian problems and being “insensitive” to it. But as the head of the highest law enforcing institution of the country, if one starts bothering about such things, then he would be doing more disservice to the nation, he says. He reminds the people, particularly the politicians, how the corruption in local authorities like civic bodies has become a big source of money generation both for officials and the people in property related matters. Sealing in Delhi is one example of such malaise plaguing the society and no Constitutional authority can be expected to close his eyes to such illegalities. On the administrative front, Justice Sabharwal’s biggest contribution was to bring in more transparency in the functioning of the Supreme Court. He did so by sharing all administrative decisions with the media, bringing out a fortnightly house journal detailing its administrative and judicial decisions, and speeding up the computerisation programme to make e-filing of petitions and replies possible. He issued constant directives to high court Chief Justices to firm up the criminal justice delivery system. On the judicial side, the unanimous decision by the nine-judge constitution Bench on Supreme Court’s power of judicial review of any law parked in the Ninth Schedule, if they violated the basic structure doctrine laid down in the Constitution, not only showed his acumen as a judge but the able leadership quality to earn the confidence of all his brother judges. They have defined the most vital but crucial question that will have a wide impact on protecting the citizens’ fundamental rights from being encroached upon by any legislative action. In the words of noted Constitution expert Fali S Nariman, the two judgements - upholding the power of Parliament to sack its members for any misconduct and power of judicial review of Ninth Schedule laws - has done a great service to the nation by reiterating the supremacy of Constitution and striking a fine balance between the three wings of Government. That is why he has described the two judgements as “statesmanlike” verdicts given by the Court after so many years. Certainly Justice Sabharwal deserves due credit for it for not only tightening the law on this score, but for taking the initiative to dispose of a bunch of petitions on the Ninth Schedule laws, which had been pending before the Supreme Court for the past three decades, with the first appeal on the issue filed way back in 1976 by I R Coelho from Tamil Nadu, who unfortunately is not alive today to see the fate of his litigation. The other important matter that certainly would have a great impact on our system of governance is the judgement on enforcing police reforms. In the process he ensured that he would not leave this matter unresolved. He took great pains in cajoling the Centre and states to submit replies to hear the case that had been pending for over a decade, and various reports on it gaining dust in Centre’s cold storage. Even on the last day in office, he ensured that the states’ scepticism on implementing the order did not prevail and rejected their objections to many of the seven-point directives, by fixing a deadline of March 31 to put the new mechanism in place. Among the other notable judgements given by Justice Sabharwal was on the misuse of Governor’s power by the Centre to imposing President’s rule in states. The verdict in the Bihar case, would certainly put a check on the Centre invoking Article 356 at will, particularly on political considerations rather than meeting the Constitutional requirements. |
|
When desi fashion wowed Paris FRENCH models in October 2006 walked the ramp in Paris displaying smart, stylish jackets in black, maroon and blue with some fine embroidery around the waist. They were made in India by a group of village artisans from different regions of the country who have come together to form what is a probably the country’s first company of weavers and craftsmen, under the banner Rangsutra. Called the ethical fashion show, the Paris show sought to promote fair trade practices that ensure that artisans and others engaged in production of yarns, fabrics and embellishments like embroidery get a fair wage. Rangsutra had teamed up with the Paris-based design house ‘Numanu’ and walked away with a fashion award for couture trousers, coats and tops. Olivia Lalonde of Numanu had come to India to see the work of the Rangsutra groups and to work out a jacket design that would bring laurels for the craftsmen and India. The silk lining for the jackets were woven by the women of the Sunderbans. The soft woollen fabric of the jackets was dyed and woven by weavers of the Vasundhara Gramothan Samiti, Rajasthan. The jackets were tailored by the Urmul Seemant Samiti of Bajju in Bikaner district and exquisite embroidery was crafted by the women of Bajju. It was a collective endeavour that was possible only because so many different artisans with different skills were involved. For a company that started in December 2004 with a 1000 artisans pooling in Rs 1000 each as share holders, it was an amazing success. Rangsutra is literally weaving dreams into reality, says Sumita Ghose, the woman who conceptualized this unique company of producers to ensure sustainable livelihoods for artisans and farmers, by creating top quality hand made products based on the principles of fair trade. The label on the jackets designed for the French show says ‘Numanu, label of love’ and it is literally that. The 300 jackets were sold for Rs 12 lakhs and earned a neat profit of Rs 1 lakh for the artisans. Next year these jackets will be available in the Indian markets and the profit margins will be infinitely larger. With an initial investment of Rs 10 lakhs, Rangsutra is hoping to raise Rs 20 lakhs from a venture capitalist in Mumbai in 2007-2008 and another Rs 20 lakhs the following year. The old order of artisans and craftsmen selling their products to middle men for small sums of money is over. A company by the producers themselves ensures larger profit margins. It is also inculcating entrepreneurship in craftspeople and other rural producers so that they can transform their creative work and organizations into enterprises that are viable, sustainable and profit making. Since many of the artisans are from drought prone areas of the country or from remote villages in the interior of the country where livelihoods are uncertain, crafts should ensure sustainable livelihoods when marketed vigorously keeping in mind consumer demands, says Sumita. Working with various designers so that their products are in keeping with current trends and fashions, Rangsutra is expanding in a big way. The focus is on big orders. This year they have got an order of close to Rs 45 lakhs from Fab India and another big one from a Mumbai group. Currently an exhibition of Rangsutra’s work is on at the Chinmaya Mission, Lodhi Road, Delhi. Rangsutra producer, Mularam, 35, comes from a family of weavers and has been engaged in the family business for 15 years. Being a member of the URMUL Samiti, he got the opportunity to learn new designs, using different kinds of yarn, and the crucial art of quality and perfection. Before joining URMUL Samiti, he worked for middlemen and payments were late, the raw material of poor quality and the work erratic. Now he gets his raw material and designs from URMUL and payments on time. He takes home Rs 3000 to Rs 4000 a month. Pappu Devi was an assistant to her weaver husband. After joining URMUL, she broke the centuries old taboo that forbids women from working on looms and learnt to weave. Since her husband does not keep well, he appreciates her contribution to the family income. Her work is as good as mine, he says. Paro Bai of Dandkala village, Bajju, Bikaner, is a skilled needle woman. A refuge from Pakistan after the 1971 war, she brought with her embroidering skills of Pakistan. Initially she lived in a refugee camp in Barmer, and later resettled in Bajju. There are 300 women, supported by URMUL Seemant, who embroider to make a life for themselves and their families. Paro Bai is the patriarch of the group. It was her daughter, Mathri, who embroidered the jackets for Paris. |
|
Inside Pakistan THE announcement of the Pakistan Federal Cabinet’s decision that General Pervez Musharraf will seek re-election as President by the present national and provincial assemblies between September 15 and October 15, the government’s denial in the Senate notwithstanding, has led to interesting comments by most newspapers. They have accused him of trying to misuse a constitutional provision to perpetuate his rule. A Dawn editorial titled “So the game plan is out”, said: “That the experts approve of this kind of presidential election does not hide the political and ethical negativity of the move. To be technically correct does not necessarily mean being morally irreproachable; in fact, the people of Pakistan and the world will be justified if they regard Wednesday’s decision as a morally bankrupt and ill-advised one which will destroy all hope of Pakistan’s return to democracy — democracy, as it is understood and practiced the world over.” The editorial adds: “The tough line taken by the President against the two mainstream parties — the PPP and the PML-N — can now be understood: the election that is to follow the presidential drama has lost all meaning.” In an editorial, The News said: “The decision taken by the Federal Cabinet that the current national and provincial assemblies will vote in the next presidential election – where the winner will be elected to a five-year term – is a controversial one and could well have unintended negative consequences for the country’s democratic dispensation. “On the face of it, the election of a president to a five-year term by outgoing assemblies may seem difficult to justify from a moral and ethical point of view despite the fact that this may be within the ambit of the Constitution.” the Jang group daily pointed out.
Hankering for a water war Lahore and the surrounding areas are heading towards a serious water crisis. According to Nawa-i-Waqt, the ground water level in the historic city has gone down to a dangerously low level because of recklessness in having tube-wells. “A few years ago experts from outside Pakistan had advised that no new tube-wells should be allowed to come up and the old ones should be replaced. But more and more new tube-wells are being sunk because of political reasons”, says the paper in its January 12 editorial, quoting its own investigative report. The report had it that 20 years ago Lahore had only 200 tube-wells, but today the number is 375. Forty-four new tube-wells are going to come up soon. The tube-wells work for 16-18 hours daily. As a result, the ground water level is going down by 6.25 ft per annum whereas 20 years ago the decline was only 6 inches annually. “If the situation continues to be like this Lahore and the adjoining areas will be faced with an acute water shortage by 2020-2025. This may lead to ‘water-shedding’ as is the case with power and Sui gas supply”, the paper warns. But, instead of asking the administration to prevent further sinking of tube-wells, Nawa-i-Waqt blames India for the coming water crisis. It accuses India of “having stopped the flow of water in the rivers passing through Kashmir for many years.” In its opinion, “The ground water shortage cannot end as long as the Ravi and the Chenab do not have full flow of water in them.” Surprisingly, it also talks of a war between India and Pakistan for finding a solution to the water crisis at a time when a peace process is on between the two neighbours! This otherwise popular Urdu daily reflects the dangerous thinking of a section of the Pakistanis who refuse to see the ground reality.
Debating the Durand Line There is no end to the debate over the Durand Line. Pakistan justifies the status quo, but Afghanistan claims that the Pashtu-speaking area beyond this line should have been included in it. In his informative article carried in Dawn on January 18, former ambassador Ghayoor Ahmed says: “Successive regimes in Afghanistan have refused to acknowledge the Durand Line as the international border between the two countries and have demanded the integration of the Pashtu-speaking inhabitants on the Pakistani side of the frontier with Afghanistan or (the creation of) an autonomous, perhaps independent, Pakhtoonistan. They have argued that the Pathans in Pakistan and Afghanistan form a single ethnic unit and should be united in one state.” Justifying Pakistan’s claim, he argues, “The fact of the matter is that the Pathans living on the Pakistani side of the Durand Line enjoyed close political and economic ties with the major states of the Indus valley and had even developed linguistic differences with the Pathan inhabitants living in Afghanistan’s tribal areas.” Mr Ahmed refers to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties against Afghanistan’s argument that “Pakistan was not a successor state to Britain” and, therefore, “could not inherit the rights of an ‘extinguished person’ (i.e. British India).” No one, however, exactly knows what the Pathans on both sides of the Durand Line want today. |
Cursed be the ritual that makes us forget the Loved One. — Guru Nanak The man who can hold back his rising anger is indeed the driver of —The Buddha There is to be no compulsion in religion. True direction is in fact distinct from error: so whoever disbelieves in idols and believes in God has taken hold of the most reliable handle, which does not break. For God is all-hearing and all-knowing. —The Koran |
| 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 | |
JUSTICE Y K Sabharwal, who demitted the office of the Chief Justice of India after an eventful and remarkable tenure of little over a year, has adjudicated upon several contentious and important Constitutional issues that no other CJI had done in the recent past. This certainly distinguishes his short stint as the Constitutional head of the judiciary from several of his predecessors, and the judgements delivered by him as head of various constitution Benches are seen to carry wide ramifications.