 |
|
Tryst with
nuclear destiny Profile |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Let
courts be humane towards poor undertrials On Record Linking
Hansi-Bhutana canal with Bhakra canal
|
Tryst with nuclear destiny The
political turmoil created by the Indo-US 123 Agreement was not entirely unexpected. But it took two years for the issue to be raised in such a manner that it has snowballed into a major controversy. The negotiations have been on since the Joint Statement of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and US President George Bush on July 18, 2005; any stoppage of the process now would raise extremely awkward questions about India’s capacity to keep its assurances in the international arena. Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954 is one of the longer sections of the Act and relates to cooperation with other nations. Other agreements have been signed under the provisions of this Section. It is under the umbrella of this provision that the deal with India has been negotiated. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states that treaties are to be interpreted “in good faith”. We should not read more into the 123 Agreement beyond what is stated. What does it say? Article 2 – Scope of Cooperation – inter alia states: “The parties shall cooperate in the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement”. The Agreement is intended to assist us in our peaceful civilian nuclear programme and does not interfere with unsafeguarded nuclear activity with various commitments made by the US. Besides, this is not a US related treaty alone; it opens up the next step, of having to negotiate with other countries, 45 of them in the Nuclear Supplies Group, with whom India would have to do business. The requirement, in return, is that its civilian programme will be under IAEA safeguards. The fact remains that India continues to be a non-signatory to the NPT and there is no change, unlike what some critics would like us to believe, in any aspect of India’s basic foreign policy. What about the Hyde Act itself? The “Henry J. Hyde United States- India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006’’ is an Act “to exempt from certain requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 a proposed nuclear agreement for cooperation with India.” Under Section 103, a certain policy approach has been taken. Section 104 D (2) proposes certain Congressional oversight and requires the President to submit to the appropriate Congressional Committees certain details within 180 days of the 123 Agreement coming into force. President Bush himself has said these provisions are not binding. According to him, "extraneous and prescriptive provisions of the Hyde Act were only advisory and were not to be his foreign policy”. He has said, “My approval of the Act does not constitute my adoption of the statements of policy as US foreign policy. Given the Constitution’s commitment to the presidency of the authority to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs, the executive branch shall construe such policy statements as advisory.” The 123 Agreement itself does not anywhere mention the Hyde Act. Surely, there is sufficient reason for that. And as Mr A.G. Noorani has pointed out in an article, the Hyde Act makes references to Iran, Pakistan and China; “this has not caused any panic in Beijing.” The 123 Agreement has been carefully drafted. In the event the US were to find it necessary to terminate the Agreement, this is to be done under certain conditions under Article 14. Even after negotiations, if the Agreement falls through, there are certain safeguards for India. Indeed, in using the “right to return” options, the importance of uninterrupted operation of nuclear reactors would be taken into account and the value of the materials to be returned, if any, would be paid for. An issue being raised by some sections is that nuclear energy is more expensive than coal or oil and, in that sense is not cost effective. Certainly, on the face of it, nuclear energy is today more expensive. However, it is rather an unlimited resource, especially when compared to oil which is incredibly finite. The fact that our own oil reserves are limited and we are unable to find new sources should be a matter of concern. The cost of oil has gone from about $20 to $70 in a few years and will go up again as and when world reserves dwindle. In any case, that will also place us in a dependent situation. As for coal, its burning leads to increasing ecological problems. Thermal energy will remain one of our options. But why remove nuclear energy for all practical purposes? China’s policy is to reduce dependence on oil and coal; that should also be ours. France derives 75 per cent of its electricity from civilian nuclear energy. It has 59 reactors. It is among the leaders in developing nuclear technology. Nuclear energy is a guarantee of energy security. Through this agreement, India has come close to receiving nuclear supplies even without signing the NPT, a unique offer. This is indeed because of our international clout, and not because of any US hegemony. The People’s Daily of the Chinese Communist Party has said “Judging from the text, the US has made big concessions and met almost all Indian requests, including full supply of nuclear fuel to India and allowing it to dispose of nuclear waste”. It has further said “India’s right to continue conducting nuclear testing will depend on ‘circumstances’. According to the text, if India can satisfactorily justify its nuclear testing, the US would acquiesce. That is, Washington has actually acknowledged India’s right to retain nuclear testing”. That US might be the main business partner in nuclear supplies, if indeed it were to be, should not be an issue. Importantly, there need not be any ideological problem in commercial dealings with the US; the US is the single largest country in terms of trade for both India and China. China’s exports to the US was $ 243 billion in 2005, second only to Canada in exports to the US. In the context of its nuclear programme, China has begun work on a new nuclear plant on August 18, 2007, as part of a programme to have 31 new plants by 2020. China has placed orders for four reactors with Westinghouse, who reportedly have agreed to provide technology. As for India, there is no reason to believe that we will deal only with the US. John F. Kennedy, former US President, once said, “The purpose of foreign policy is not to provide an outlet for our own sentiments, it is to shape the real events in the real world.” The nation needs to view its nuclear deal in the global context apart from its need to build itself as a super economic power. As T. S. Eliot says, in The Hollow Men, “Between the idea and the reality…falls the shadow.” One need not be frightened by the shadow of misgivings. There is a view that the matter should be voted in Parliament. The approach is that a majority of MPs are against the deal. It is necessary to go beyond party politics to see whether this deal is good for India. In the nationwide debate that has occurred, a vast majority of the Indians who are aware of the deal, have expressed an overwhelming support for the arrangement. Countries such as Russia and France, to name some, are in favour of the deal and have no problems with it. According to one report, various concerns of the Left parties have been taken care of fairly well in the finally negotiated Agreement. There is no reason to believe that we have got a raw deal. The present geopolitical realities, and our own growing clout, will not cause any major mishap. The deal will take us out of our nuclear isolation and at the same time result in billions of dollars of investment, business and, importantly, downstream economic activity. We should seize this opportunity which may not knock at our door again. As Anataloe France, the French author has said, “To accomplish great things, we must not only act, but also dream; not only plan, but also believe”.
The writer is Chairman, Administrative Reforms Commission, Government of India, New Delhi
|
|
Profile Then came on the scene the “Messiah for the Indian hockey”. Joaquim Carvalho, popularly called “jack” by his friends, was part of the 1984 Los Angeles Olympic squad, considered one of the strongest ever to leave the Indian shores. He was in for a surprise when the Indian Hockey Federation offered him the post of
coach of the team. It was not an easy task to put the Indian team on the rail again. A surprised Carvalho, gave lot of thought to the offer, consulted his friends and family members and finally decided to accept the IHF offer but put forward certain conditions. Besides being given a freehand, he wanted to have supporting staff of his choice and a say in selection of team members. The Federation readily accepted his terms. Losing no time, Carvalho opted for two of his closest friends and former Indian team maters, M.M. Somayya and Mervyn Fernandes, as members of his supporting staff with Mohinder Pal Singh, former ace penalty corner hitter, and Parmeshwaran as assistant coaches. Carvalho began his training session of the Indian squad in right earnest. A strict disciplinarian, he would not compromise on anything less than the best for his side. He started paying attention to the minutest detail which other short-term coaches ignored. They included sharpening up play and deep penetration by the forwards, more legwork than better stick work, sturdiness in midfield and stability in defence. Carvalho turned out to be a self-made coach who believes that players learn more and quicker on the field than through computers and whiteboards. He made his sessions short, precise and to the point. His motto has been “keep it simple and talk to the players in a language they understand”. During his playing days, he recalls, how he used to “spend boring hours listening to lectures from my coaches or watching match videos and promptly forgetting them the minute I left the room”. The Indian team’s performance steadily improved since Carvalho took over the job in March this year and culminated in a massive victory in the Seventh Asia Cup Hockey Championship with a 7-2 drubbing of South Korea, world’s sixth-ranked team. Carvalho is now credited with motivating a team blamed in the past for lacking both unity and fitness. His mantra has been “hard running, retackling and pressing”. He has now set his eyes on 2008 Olympics in Beijing and says, “our boys have talent and potential” to excel in China. The ensuing Champions Challenge tournament in Antwerp, the fashion capital of Belgium, would be the first step in the long journey towards regaining India’s pristine hockey glory. Since his playing days, Indian hockey has slumped to an abysmal low. However, encouraged by the thunderous success in Asia Cup, Carvalho is all set to fine tune his team for Beijing. His long experience and dedication is proving to be an asset. His name stands among the leading hockey players of the sub-continent and he was picked up to play for the World XI in 1985. He also led the Indian team in 1985-86 season and was voted the best centre-half in the world. He had been a leading player in 1984 Los Angles Olympics and 1986 World Cup in
London.
|
|
— Kulsum Sharif, wife of deposed Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif, in London I am reminded of Amitabh Bachchan’s popular song, Mere Angene mein tumhara kya kam hein…The US has no business in our territory in the name of naval exercises. It’s only a beginning of a struggle and the next four or five months will be very crucial. — CPI leader A.B. Bardhan What’s wrong with my Prisons Minister Baba Siddique hugging Sanjay Dutt? They are family friends. Don’t we rub shoulders with criminals in Parliament? If I ban contact between MPs and convicts, what would we do with Sanjay Dutt’s sister, Congress MP Priya Dutt? — Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh Democracy is not just a question of voting systems, and having a good Constitution. It is a question of — and the English have a wonderful expression for it — accepting things which are done and not done. As long as this code does not exist, each democracy has its difficulties. — Karel
Schwarzenburg, Czech Foreign Minister It is not minarets which are dangerous; it is basements and garages which hide secret places of worship. — French President Nicolas Sarkozy Salman Khan did try to manipulate the chinkara case, but he couldn’t.The message now is clear: nobody is above the law. — Belinda Wright, Wildlife Protection Society of India — Preity Zinta
|
Let courts be humane towards poor undertrials In
a historic intervention, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court advised lower courts to be sensitive on the issue of granting bail to undertrials accused of minor crimes. Justice R.S. Sodhi and Justice H.R. Malhotra ruled that no taxpayer remained lodged behind bars for a long duration. Such an intervention was overdue. However, the question is how many undertrials would stand to benefit from these instructions if lower courts realised the importance of the ruling. Lower courts would also need to change their mindset as they have been used to acting according to the letter and not by the spirit of the law. Santosh Dhanvare, a young rickshawpuller of Surat, was lodged in the police custody for 30 months after he was arrested in July 2004 on a charge of theft of Rs 4,000. His pleas of innocence fell on deaf ears and had been produced before the First Class Magistrate for 30 times since then. Hearing was put off each time due to absence of witnesses or even his own lawyer, appointed for him by the court. Each time he was sent back to custody with a new date for hearing. In desperation, he was willing, on January 3, 2007, to admit the crime even though he had not committed one. He wanted to be awarded due punishment but the magistrate refused to accept his plea on the ground that witnesses were not present. Hence she assigned a new date and Santosh expressed his frustration by throwing his chappal at her. Obviously, he would face another criminal case because of his expression of anger because the state and the judicial system would not count him as a human being. He would always be treated as a criminal as long as he was in custody with the state. Santosh had lost his father after his arrest. His mother was washed away in the swirling flood waters of the Tapi river in August, 2006. He had nothing in life to cling on to. That is why, he was desperate after spending a long time in jail. If the High Court ruling were to be followed, he could have been granted bail. But Santosh did not even seek one as he knew he would not be able to raise the bail amount nor find anyone willing to stand surety for him for the bail amount. His poverty had condemned him to remain inside the jail as long as his case was not disposed of. His poverty had ensured that he remained in jail beyond the period of due punishment if his crime was proved. The laws relating to bail applications are same for all but they differently operate for those who have money and clout and for those who don’t enjoy such a privilege. Several persons accused of involvement even in terrorist acts, organised crime and murder have managed to get bail because of their clout and money power but not people like Santosh Dhanvare. The lower court would not meet the ends of justice unless it took into account the spirit and not merely the letter of the law. The magistrate should have been told that Santosh had already spent more months in jail than the warranted maximum punishment for his minor offence. His trial was not over because witnesses behaved irrationally and irresponsibly. The magistrate continued to provide benefit to the prosecution even though it had failed to produce the witnesses. The prosecution continued to benefit and Santosh was condemned in the jail. The police and the prosecution saw no injustice in this case because of their interest in seeking commitment of crime rather than disposal of the case. The court-appointed lawyer saw no benefit in seeking justice for Santosh because he had no earning from it. Witnesses were not obliged to attend the court. Santosh was a victim of the insensitive system where the main players were the police, the prosecutor, the magistrate and witnesses over which he had no hold nor could he expect them to play fair and just in the interest of real justice. The NGOs that boast of achievements in human rights also don’t see palpable injustice in such cases because Santosh has been dealt with according to the letter of the existing law. The missing spirit of the law and the lack of sensitive approach that the Delhi High Court wants the lower courts to adopt were not visible to anyone. Santosh is not the only victim of the insensitive delivery of justice. Even the National Human Rights Commission admitted in its report in 2005 that over three lakh undertrials were languishing in jails all over the country for longer periods than their minor offence would invite punishment. Nearly 821 inmates - all undertrials for minor offences - have recently been released from New Delhi’s Tihar jail after the Supreme Court ordered a review of the inmates’ cases by the special courts inside the Tihar Jail. Nearly 83 per cent of inmates in this jail were undertrials. About 1200 applied for an offence bargain system for the first time, but it was only to reduce overcrowding in the jail rather than to meeting the ends of justice. Santosh is not a hardened criminal. He had a heart, mind, emotions and sensitivities. But the system and its players preferred to ignore all and treated him like a hardened criminal. His case could have easily been settled at the third or fourth hearing date after the named witnesses failed to turn up. If witnesses don’t turn up for a fixed number of hearings, the accused and not the prosecution should have the advantage. Or there should be a system of accountability for prosecution to produce witnesses named in the chargesheet. Such reforms are needed to help those who don’t have the money and clout to seek justice and freedom. Sensitivity must be displayed in the disposal of cases and not only in granting
bails.
|
|
On Record
The
Energy Resources Institute (TERI) Director-General R.K. Pachauri is a strong supporter of having two time zones to help a vast country like India counter problems like energy crisis. According to a TERI study in 1988, the peak demand could be lowered by 220 MW if India had two different time zones. In an interview to The Sunday Tribune, Pachauri says two time zones would de-couple the peak energy consumption schedules in different parts of the country and open up the possibility of transferring power from the West to the East and vice versa.
Excerpts: Q: What exactly is your view on pushing the IST or having two different time zones in the country? A:
India’s breadth is very large. If you go to the eastern parts, the sun rises much earlier and sets much earlier. Thus, a single time zone doesn’t make sense for us. The US has four time zones. Of course, it is a larger country in terms of longitude. We must examine the benefits of the concept and do a detailed exercise, not bureaucratic, but objective and analytical. Q: The Union Ministries of Power, Science and Technology and the National Physical Laboratory oppose this. Why? A:
Has anyone given a coherent and logical reason against two time zones? Dismissing it out of hand is arbitrary. There is government resistance to anything new and their attitude is they know the best. Q: What are the primary benefits of two time zones? A: Our big problem in the power sector is the growing peak demand. There are two types of demands for energy, some are clock related and others sun related. When a farmer gets up in the morning, he doesn’t necessarily look at his watch. He gets up at sunrise as his activities are related to sunrise and sunset. Office and factory workers have to follow the clock. If you move the clock forward or back the period that you have the peak demand for power will also move forward or backward. If they switch on their water heaters and lights an hour earlier, they will also switch them off an hour earlier. If you have two time zones, the peak demand in the eastern time zone will be different from the one in the western time zone, implying that power can also be exchanged through a national grid. When there is a higher demand for power in the East, the capacity from the West can supply power there and vice versa. That way, one can de-couple the power demand of the two regions, avoid duplication of peak capacity in the country and easily meet the demand in all parts by staggering the capacity. You can manage with much lower peak capacity and cut down
power cuts and restrictions. Q: Any other benefits? A: Why should people in the east have to follow the routine or office timings of those living in the west? For instance, the Indian Army follows a routine daily — go to parade at 7 am. Surely in parts of the country where the sun rises earlier, the daily routine can begin earlier. Q: Will there be confusion in airlines and railways timings? A: The US has four different time zones, but there is no confusion there. In the US, if you are in the east and go to Chicago, the clock shifts by one hour. In Europe, trains run from one corner to another through different time zones without confusion. When you cross a place, people set their watches and there is no confusion. We did a major study for the Advisory Board for Energy in 1988 where we assessed benefits of different time zones in terms of lower capacity for power that would be required and that is a major benefit. That time we felt 5 per cent of the capacity could be saved. Things have changed and peak demand is going up. Now it is even more compelling to do a re-think and carry an objective exercise. Q: Wouldn’t shifting the timings of office hours be simpler? A: Isn’t it the same whether you shift the time or the clock? The bottom line is that timings of factories and offices that are controlled by the clock or the watch should be staggered. Q: Are you pursuing the matter with the authorities? A:
We can only put forward the concept. The decision-making authorities have to decide. Let us assess the situation objectively. I am not advocating anything just that we have a growing demand for power and it is worth examining the concept of two time zones for the country. The most advanced countries, all over Europe, and Russia have different time zones. So are we in some backward country living in the Stone
Age?
|
|
Linking Hansi-Bhutana canal with Bhakra canal The
hurried manner in which the builders of the Hansi-Bhutana Canal constructed the 110-km-long canal at a cost of Rs 390 crore and now trying to connect it to the Bhakra Main Line Canal near RD 340, raises many questions about the problems likely to arise. According to newspaper reports (August 4, 2007), the HB canal water is just 15 feet away from the Bhakra canal waterline. The only hurdle for water to flow into it is the 15-feet-wide bank of the Bhakra Main Line Canal. The contractor building the new canal says that it is now just a one-night job. The HB canal builders say that if they successfully connect the old canal with double title lining, it will be a great achievement. Thus, there is need to examine the problems which may arise so that the builders exercise due caution. The Bhakra Main Line Canal at the site of the proposed connection, i.e. RD 340,000 ft, carries some 6,795 cusecs water at full supply. Being a canal fed from the Nangal Dam, the variation in the discharge is not much. Normally, if a connection were to made available in regular mode, we would have to build a cross regulator with full control with gated system and a side regulator also equipped with gated control. But as the HB builders cannot wait for that, they have built an off-taking lined canal with three gates control. Through the new canal 2000 cusecs, about 30 per cent of the total BML capacity is to be taken away. The regulation of the irrigation flows in the BML canal is carried by the Punjab Irrigation Department (which is considered a hostile agency by the HB canal builders). The water sharing is to be done for Punjab’s off-taking canals and to pass down Rajasthan’s share and Haryana’s share of 4,000 cusecs. At present, this fine-tuned regulation is affected through the cross regulator located at RD 466,000 ft. This mode would not be able to control the flow into the new off-taking canal, located 8 km lower down. It would trigger inter-state water sharing dispute among the three states. The new regulator on the off-taking HB canal would be under the control of the Haryana Irrigation Department. So the problem would get more complicated. This is a very difficult task that most engineers would be reluctant to undertake, but the builders don’t seem to be worried. Normally, at the junction of the new work and the old canal lining, a rubber seal would need to be provided along with a curtain wall and a grout-curtain to prevent leakage or seepage which may result in the failure of the BML canal. The question that arises is: who will stand guarantee to the completion of the work as the regulation will be done by the Punjab Irrigation Department? The off-taking weir interface between the BML and the HB canals should work in the most complex hydraulic conditions due to the configuration and relative locations of the two canals. It would have to operate in a near head-loss state with the head dropping from the upstream end to the downstream and of being a broad-crested shape. The design should be subjected to rigorous model testing before being adopted and implemented. Normally, when a canal of the size of the HB canal is to be filled, the mode adopted is slow release of water into the new canal, which is gradually raised to full volume so that the leakage or seepage noticed at any location is stopped by carefully laid-out procedures. But will the builders of the HB canal, who are in a hurry and working in stealthy manner, mostly at night, be able to commission the 110-km-long system with many drainage crossings, without any difficulty? May God save the BML from any damage in the ongoing construction as it is the lifeline of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan
farmers. The writer is a former Chief Engineer (Research) and Director, Irrigation and Power, Punjab
|
| 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 | |
E
I can take on Musharraf and his entire Army. We are not afraid of him. It is he who is afraid of us. If we are anywhere in the country, he spends sleepless nights. Nawaz Sharif’s popularity is very high today.
Politicians always say the right things. We have to test them. I believe that activists and civil society in Pakistan have a very long struggle ahead. We have to constantly remain the watchdogs.
The film on the Rani of Jhansi isn’t just another mega project. It’s a legacy I will be leaving behind to the world. This is celebrating history, so whatever I do will be part of history. 
Tailpiece:
I could have seen the film Chak De India in the comfort of a multiplex, but to gauge the reaction of the audience, I had to sit among the masses. I went along with my mom and cousin, hidden in a burkha, and because nobody could see me, I was at my buoyant best.