 |
|
Death row Belated response |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Blunder down under
Critical weeks ahead in B’desh
Screaming times
Road to Rawalpindi A good year for the consumer justice system Chatterati
|
Death row THE Pervez Musharraf regime's claim that PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto's assassination was the handiwork of Baitullah Mehsud, a Waziristan-based Al-Qaida operative, has been punctured by the extremist himself. Through a spokesman, Baitullah has said, "I strongly deny it. Tribal people have their own customs. We don't strike at women." Interestingly, the extremist's spokesman expressed "deep grief and shock" over the killing of Benazir, describing her not only "a leader of Pakistan but also a leader of international fame". After his denial, few will believe a Western news agency report quoting Al-Qaida commander Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid as saying that "We terminated the most precious American asset which vowed to defeat (the) mujahideen". The PPP has described as a "pack of lies" the government's theory that she died of injuries suffered in her skull as she hit the lever in her bullet-proof car's sunroof. PPP spokesperson Sherry Rehman, who was with Benazir when she fell to the bullets fired by the suicide bomber who later on blew himself up, saw a bullet wound at the back of Benazir's head. According to the PPP, she also had another wound in her neck. It seems the caretaker regime is doing all it can to deny Benazir the status of a martyr, who gave her life for the cause of democracy in Pakistan. It is working overtime to prove that the PPP leader was a victim of her own habit of waiving her hands whenever she saw cheering supporters. The government wants the world to believe that this is the reason why the suicide bomber got an opportunity to kill her. There is no doubt that she had been on the hit list of Al-Qaida, the Taliban and other extremist outfits. The government obviously knew it. Then why did it not provide her foolproof security? The slain PPP leader feared a threat to her life as much from the extremists as from certain people close to President Musharraf. But those behind her killing cannot be identified by the kind of probe ordered by the caretaker regime. The government's desperate offer of exhuming her body will also not help. The ends of justice can be met only by holding an independent enquiry by associating international experts.
|
|
Belated response IT is now clear that the Naveen Patnaik government in Orissa has failed to protect the life and property of the Christians in Kandhamal district. Desecration of churches and attacks on the faithful, allegedly by the Sangh Parivar outfits, proved the government’s inability to carry out its constitutional duty to protect the minorities. The situation has now been brought under control but tension prevails. There were clear signs of a communal rift between the ‘Pana’ community, a tribal sect which adopted Christianity and speaks the Kuyi dialect, the language of the Kondhs, and the Kondh tribals. However, the district administration did little to nip it in the bud. The intelligence, too, failed to alert the police and civil authorities in time. Steel and Mines Minister Padmanabha Behera, a Biju Janata Dal MLA from Phulbani, who has resigned owning moral responsibility for the violence, made matters worse by his questionable conduct during the past few weeks. When the Kondhamal Kuyi Samaj Coordination Committee gave call for a 36-hour bandh from December 25, the minister should have removed their misapprehensions about according the Scheduled Tribe status to the Pana community. Such a decision should be taken only after considering all aspects of the demand. In no case should a government succumb to the pressure tactics of an organisation, however powerful it may be. On its part, the government took the matter lightly when the Vishwa Hindu Parishad gave a bandh call on the Christmas day in protest against a reported attack on a swami. The chief minister has visited the affected areas and promised all help to the Christian community. He has sought additional paramilitary forces from the Centre and appointed a young IAS officer as the District Collector. He has also ordered a judicial inquiry into the violence by a retired judge of the Orissa High Court. But experience suggests that the state governments usually order judicial inquiries to buy time and avoid prompt decisions. Moreover, these commissions are not time bound and take years to submit reports after many extensions. Justice demands that all those involved in the violence are brought to book promptly and punished in accordance with the law.
|
|
Blunder down under WHILE a tight schedule and consequent lack of proper preparation is one of the factors for the abject defeat that the touring Indians have suffered in the opening Test match in Australia, an old problem with selection of the playing 11 is surely the main culprit. Consider the domino effect of one single selection decision. Because of Yuvraj Singh’s big hundred in Bangalore against Pakistan he had to be somehow “accommodated.” So what does India do? Play a Test match against Australia in their own backyard, with a makeshift opening pair. Never mind that Rahul Dravid, who was bumped up the order into the role, was down on form and luck, and would need all his talent just to find his feet again. As a consequence, the man produced a couple of atrocious innings. One was a 56-ball five, and the other a 114-ball 16, reminiscent of that last Oval innings on the English tour, where he scored 12 in some 90-odd balls. Make no mistake - the man has 9704 Test runs at an average of 55, and he is one of the very best. But he is clearly in a trough. And the point is not about what the other batsmen achieved, or rather did not, in trying conditions. You can’t go far if you get off on the wrong foot. This leaves India with some hard choices for the next match. You can’t play Test cricket without opening batsmen. Dinesh Karthik produced the goods in demanding conditions in the West Indies and in England, though failing in India. The other option is Virendra Sehwag, included at the last minute on the back of his form on paper in Australia. Kumble is looking at a situation where either Rahul or Yuvraj has to sit out. The point is not about any individual players. The point is about how decisions regarding the final 11 are made. There is no point whining any more about schedules and the lack of opportunity to prepare. When it is time for the next Test at Sydney, go in with a fighting 11.
|
|
Tyranny is always better organised than freedom. — Charles Peguy
|
Critical weeks ahead in B’desh
THE next few weeks and months may determine where Bangladesh is headed. Behind a seemingly calm business as usual exterior, a visitor to Dhaka is liable to encounter undercurrents of anxiety about future trends. The oil shock and two floods, followed by the harsh November cyclone Sidr, have caused damage and distress and a price rise that could be aggravated by an estimated three million tonne crop loss as forecast. This could trigger unrest that would be an added embarrassment at a time when the caretaker administration and the two major parties are trying to come to terms with their own predicament and with one another so as not to upset what is at best a delicate political balance. A caretaker government took office under a constitutional mandate to hold the ring in the run-up to the forthcoming general elections that were due early in 2007. Partisan appointments of the designated head of the caretaker government and the election commissioner by the then ruling BNP government aroused strong opposition. The threat of escalating civil strife prompted the military to intervene on January 11, 2007, and constitute the present caretaker regime under Dr Fakhruddin Ahmed. The Caretaker set itself the task of rectifying the flawed electoral rolls, undertaking political reforms and dealing with rampant corruption. Criminal and extremist elements were curbed, the notorious Bangla Bhai was executed, political cronies were removed and corrupt politicians arrested and charged. Both Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina, the BNP and Awami League leaders, had begun to face internal party challenges on account of their somewhat imperious behaviour when they were officially arraigned for alleged excesses and improprieties. With the result, the constitutionally permitted caretaker period has been breached and the government has announced that general elections will only be held in December 2008. Bangladesh now piquantly has an extended unelected government of political necessity. Speculation has been rife as to what might happen after the elections should the new administration denounce the actions of the Interim Government and deny its functionaries immunity. Meanwhile, the BNP and the Awami League have fractured, resulting in a further loss of political cohesion. In the circumstances, it was felt best to afford everybody time and space for a cool rethink. Begum Khaleda Zia was persuaded to visit Saudi Arabia for some time while Sheikh Hasina went to the United States for the expected arrival of a new grandchild. Hasina did leave only to return suddenly, thereby aborting Khaleda Zia’s proposed sojourn in Saudi Arabia. Other factors have intervened. Quite inexplicably Hasina cosied up to the Khilafat Party, an extremist Islamist group, but soon broke away. “War criminals” (who had supported Pakistan in 1971) became vocal in proclaiming that the liberation war of 1971 had actually been a civil war whose outcome was determined by Indian intervention and that there were, therefore, no war criminals or martyrs. This reconstruction of the past presumably reflects the returning warmth between certain political and military elements in Pakistan and Bangladesh. To some, the Caretaker has tilted towards Islamic elements, placed restraints on the media and took unduly harsh measures to suppress democratic protests in Dhaka and Rajshahi Universities. Yet its bona fides are not overly suspect and it has won applause for many of its actions. It is in this context that the next few months could be critical. Political reforms cannot be imposed but must be owned by the people through their accredited political representatives. The parties and the Caretaker, therefore, need to negotiate the framework within which the on-going reforms will be upheld and sustained in the future. The establishment of a national security council, earlier kept in abeyance, is once again being mooted by some as a relevant coordinating mechanism. All of this suggests the need for a dialogue between the Caretaker-cum-military and the political actors as well as between and within the principal parties themselves. While the cases against the two Begums proceed in accordance with the law, harsher measures against them at this juncture could push internal party reformers on the back foot. Release of Dhaka and Rajshahi Universities detainees could also help promote a calmer climate for a national dialogue. Yunus, the Nobel prize winner, projected his third front candidature too soon and without adequate consultation. A national consensus built through free and open political dialogue with credible interlocutors perhaps offers the best hope of a viable and lasting solution. A step has been taken in this direction by a broadbased Nagorik Committee of intellectuals which has laid out a vision of Bangladesh 2021. The first part of this envisages political reforms through party registration, an active membership list, internal democracy, party primaries at the constituency level to nominate candidates, disclosure of wealth and public accounting and audit of party funds. A socio-economic programme has also been outlined. This could afford a useful starting point. The forthcoming polls may not yield a decisive result, with neither major party gaining a commanding majority. In such a situation, a third force under an untainted leadership could catalyse a national coalition that would hopefully take the bold decisions necessary to revivify Bangladesh’s polity, economy and foreign
relations.
|
Screaming times MY late mother, my sisters, my wife and now my fast-growing daughters have all exhibited qualities which have greatly influenced my life, and have hopefully made me a better human being. I became accustomed to their ways many years ago. Apart from being gentle, caring, creatures who always want one to eat more than one wants to, and who always worry when one comes home late, they have also proved to be pillars of strength in adverse times. I have also become used to their quirks and idiosyncrasies, in these happy times. One such womanly instinct is to yelp at the top of their voices, the moment they see a mouse in the house. Over the years I have heard many an earth-shattering scream in the most high pitched of voices, at the very sight of a rodent of that variety. Initially one used to wonder if the house was on fire or whether we were being attacked by masked bandits, and one used to run at top speed to the scene of action, ready to face anything or anyone. The neighbours probably thought on such occasions, and probably still do, that we were beating each other up or some such thing. On finding, each time, that it was a mouse that was the cause of the alarmed war-cry, one would retreat into the pages of one’s book or newspaper, as the case may be. The mouse in question too would beat a hasty retreat at such a noisy welcome and would not show up for a few days! Over the years one became rather used to such loud reactions from the ladies and nowadays one doesn’t even flinch when one hears such a scream. Whether that is a good state-of-mind for one to be in, or a bad one, only time will tell. The mice, on the other hand, not having had the benefit of one’s long-standing experience of the female species of the human race, still run helter-skelter for shelter at such an unexpectedly loud welcome, and may be some mice even suffer heart attacks at such times, poor souls. By now my wife has easily beaten all past family records in terms of the loudest scream, the longest scream and even the total number of career screams. She complains that I do not take her screams seriously and seldom lift as much as an eyebrow, whatever the intensity of the noise emanating from her otherwise very pleasant voice. I, on my part, maintain that she and her screams are equally incorrigible and that she should apply to enter the annual world screaming competition, which could be conducted at Chandigarh. The organisers would have to arrange only for participants from a few countries, a few mice and a few stout hearted onlookers, like yours truly. I have no doubt that we have a potential world champion at home. Meanwhile, the status quo continues, and I can just hear a loud
scream…
|
Road to Rawalpindi
WASHINGTON – For Benazir Bhutto, the decision to return to Pakistan was sealed during a telephone call from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice just a week before Bhutto flew home in October. The call culminated more than a year of secret diplomacy - and came only when it became clear that the heir to Pakistan’s most powerful political dynasty was the only one who could bail out Washington’s key ally in the battle against terrorism. It was a stunning turnaround for Bhutto, a former prime minister who was forced from power in 1996 amid corruption charges. She was suddenly visiting with top State Department officials, dining with U.N. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and conferring with members of the National Security Council. As President Pervez Musharraf’s political future began to unravel this year, Bhutto became the only politician who might help keep him in power. “The US came to understand that Bhutto was not a threat to stability but was instead the only possible way that we could guarantee stability and keep the presidency of Musharraf intact,” said Mark Siegel, who lobbied for Bhutto in Washington and witnessed much of the behind-the-scenes diplomacy. But the diplomacy that ended abruptly with Bhutto’s assassination Thursday was always an enormous gamble, according to current and former US policymakers, intelligence officials and outside analysts. By entering into the legendary “Great Game” of South Asia, the United States also made its goals and allies more vulnerable – in a country where more than 70 percent of the population already looked unfavorably upon Washington. Bhutto’s assassination leaves Pakistan’s future – and Musharraf’s – in doubt, some experts said. “US policy is in tatters. The administration was relying on Benazir Bhutto’s participation in elections to legitimate Musharraf’s continued power as president,” said Barnett Rubin of New York University. “Now Musharraf is finished.” Bhutto’s assassination also demonstrates the growing power and reach of militant anti-government forces in Pakistan, which pose an existential threat to the country, said J. Alexander Thier, a former U.N. official now at the US Institute for Peace. “The dangerous cocktail of forces of instability exist in Pakistan – Talibanism, sectarianism, ethnic nationalism – could react in dangerous and unexpected ways if things unravel further,” he said. But others insist the US-orchestrated deal fundamentally altered Pakistani politics in ways that will be difficult to undo, even though Bhutto is gone. “Her return has helped crack open this political situation. It’s now very fluid, which makes it uncomfortable and dangerous,” said Isobel Coleman of the Council on Foreign Relations. “But the status quo before she returned was also dangerous from a US perspective. Forcing some movement in the long run was in the US interests.” Bhutto’s assassination during a campaign stop in Rawalpindi might even work in favor of her Pakistan People’s Party, with parliamentary elections due in less than two weeks, Coleman said. “From the US perspective, the PPP is the best ally the US has in terms of an institution in Pakistan.” Bhutto’s political comeback was a long time in the works – and uncertain for much of the past 18 months. In mid-2006, Bhutto and Musharraf started communicating through intermediaries about how they might cooperate. Assistant Secretary of State Richard A. Boucher was often an intermediary, traveling to Islamabad to speak with Musharraf and to Bhutto’s homes in London and Dubai to meet with her. Under US urging, Bhutto and Musharraf met face-to-face in January and July in Dubai, according to US officials. It was not a warm exchange, with Musharraf resisting a deal to drop corruption charges so she could return to Pakistan. He made no secret of his feelings. In his 2006 autobiography In the Line of Fire, Musharraf wrote that Bhutto had “twice been tried, been tested and failed, (and) had to be denied a third chance.” She had not allowed her own party to become democratic, he alleged. “Benazir became her party’s ‘chairperson for life,’ in the tradition of the old African dictators!” A key turning point was Bhutto’s three-week US visit in August when she talked again to Boucher and to Khalilzad, an old friend. A former US ambassador in neighboring Afghanistan, Khalilzad had long been skeptical about Musharraf and while in Kabul had disagreed with then-Secretary of State Colin Powell over whether the Pakistani leader was being helpful in the fight against the Taliban. He also warned that Pakistani intelligence was allowing the Taliban to regroup in the border areas, US officials said. When Bhutto returned to the United States in September, Khalilzad asked for a lift on her plane from New York to Aspen, where they were both giving speeches. They spent much of the five-hour plane ride strategizing, said sources familiar with the diplomacy. Friends say Bhutto asked for US help. “She pitched the idea to the Bush administration,” said Peter Galbraith, a former US ambassador and friend of Bhutto from their college at Harvard. “She had been prime minister twice and had not been able to accomplish very much because she did not have power over the most important institutions in Pakistan – the ISI (intelligence agency), the military and the nuclear establishment,” he said. “Without controlling those, she couldn’t pursue peace with India, go after extremists or transfer funds from the military to social programs,” Galbraith said. “Cohabitation with Musharraf made sense because he had control over the three institutions that she never did. This was the one way to accomplish something and create a moderate center.” The turning point to get Musharraf on board was a September trip by Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte to Islamabad. “He basically delivered a message to Musharraf that we would stand by him, but he needed a democratic facade on the government, and we thought Benazir was the right choice for that face,” said Bruce Riedel, former CIA and national security council staffer now at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy. “Musharraf still detested her and he came around reluctantly as he began to recognize this fall that his position was untenable,” Riedel said. The Pakistani leader had two choices: Bhutto or former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, who Musharraf had overthrown in a 1999 military coup. “Musharraf took what he thought was the lesser of two evils,” Riedel said. Many career foreign-policy officials were skeptical of the US plan. “There were many inside the administration, at the State and Defense Departments and in intelligence, who thought this was a bad idea from the beginning because the prospects that the two could work together to run the country effectively were nil,” said Riedel. As part of the deal, Bhutto’s party agreed not to protest against Musharraf’s reelection in September to his third term. In return, Musharraf agreed to lift the corruption charges against Bhutto. But Bhutto sought one particular guarantee – that Washington would ensure Musharraf followed through on free and fair elections producing a civilian government. Rice, who became engaged in the final stages of brokering a deal, called Bhutto in Dubai and pledged that Washington would see the process through, according to Siegel. A week later, on Oct. 18, Bhutto returned. Ten weeks later, she was dead. Xenia Dormandy, former National Security Council expert on South Asia now at Harvard University’s Belfer Center, said US meddling is not to blame for Bhutto’s death. “It is very clear the United States encouraged” an agreement, she said, “but US policy is in no way responsible for what happened. I don’t think we could have played it differently.” US policy – and the commitment to Musharraf – remains unchanged. By arrangement with
|
|
A good year for the consumer justice system IF anyone had doubts about the effectiveness of the consumer justice system in the country, the year 2007 dispelled all of them. Yes, consumer justice is still not as quick as envisaged under the law. Many courts around the country are yet to come to grips with the simple procedure. Despite these drawbacks, courts continue to deliver justice and 2007 recorded a large number of highly important verdicts of the courts on a variety of issues. Usually, cases pertaining to rural consumers do not figure much in the courts. But 2007 addressed several such cases as well. In the case of United India Insurance Company vs Pallamreddy Aruna, for example, the apex court reminded insurance companies of the ground realities in our villages and said that they should keep these in mind while deciding claims. In a remote village, when a person dies of snake bite, will the relatives think of taking the body all the way to the district headquarters so that a postmortem can be done at the hospital there? Given the distance involved, absence of transportation facilities or even proper roads, the weather conditions, etc, is it even practically feasible? Yet the insurance company had repudiated the claim on the ground that postmortem was a necessary requirement under the terms of the policy. Death from snake bite is accepted as an accidental death. What about death from a cold wave ? In an order of far-reaching significance, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that death from a cold wave was also an accidental death, thereby giving the widow of a Janata Insurance policy holder the much needed relief. (Rita Devi vs National Insurance). In another important verdict, the apex court held the state government and the government seed certification agency accountable for the defective seeds sold to farmers. In response to a class action suit filed by 130 farmers from Maharashtra, seeking compensation for the defective hybrid cotton seeds sold to them, the national commission said the seed certification agency and the seed company should equally bear the burden of compensation to be paid to the farmers. Kisan Vikas Patra, too, figured during the year. Criticising the government for abdicating its responsibility towards small investors, the apex court in this case directed the government to pay back the amount of Rs 25,000 invested by the consumer, along with interest. This was a case where the government was unwilling to take responsibility for the fraud committed by the agent appointed by it to collect money for investment in the KVP. (Union of India vs Arun Borse). There were other important orders too like the one delivered in the case of B.L.Sood (BL Sood vs Delhi Transport Corporation) where the court held that even rude and uncivilised behaviour constituted deficient service, particularly when directed at senior citizens. Similarly, its order in the case of Hyundai Motors India, the commission made it clear that automobile manufacturers have to give a replacement or a refund if a consumer faced consistent problems with a new vehicle. While in the case of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad vs Abdul Azeez the court sent a clear message to the civic bodies that it would not condone inadequate safety measures in public places (the case pertained to the death of a young man in a swimming pool run by the civic body), in the case of Citicorp Maruti Finance vs S.Vijayalaxmi, it sent an even stiffer message to banks that employ musclemen for recovery of loans. “Such type of instant justice cannot be permitted in a civilised society where there is an effective rule of law”, the highest consumer court in the country said. But the order which I hope all courts in the country will always remember is the one given in the case of CERC vs New India Assurance Company. Criticising the lower courts for “erroneously following” the procedure prescribed under the Civil Procedure Code, the national commission reiterated that the only procedure prescribed under the protection law was that the courts follow the principles of natural justice. In short, its message was - shun all technicalities and stick to simple procedure. Hopefully, 2008 and all the following years will see consumer courts following this direction given by the apex court.
|
|
Chatterati Gujarat
chief minister Narendra Modi’s astrologer has been the happiest person ever since L.K. Advani was named the party’s prime minister-in-waiting. The fortune-teller is not an old acolyte of Advani, but it was just that he had seen ill omens and hiccups in Modi’s march to the Delhi durbar between 2008 and 2011. Advani’s “elevation” corroborates his claim – or rather the stumbling block in Modi’s career. In fact, the astrologer had more or less told Modi that his road to South Block would be easier. The man, parading around with an “I-told-you-so” swagger, spelt out the future in great detail. In his scheme of things, Modi would have to continue as chief minister of Gujarat till the next round of general elections before he gets a chance to look after the country as a union minister. The most coveted post in the country will come much later. This astrologer is a favourite and much in demand, at least with all BJP members. Development plank Narendra Modi’s achievement lies in the clever amalgamation of Hindutva and developmental issues, which won the hearts of the Gujarati electorate. Instead of fixing blame for the disastrous result on small fries in Gujarat, it’s high time that the AICC admit their moral responsibility for such a humiliating defeat, as they were completely in charge of the election campaign there. Despite the haunting Godhra past and both press and judiciary pitted against Modi, the win is in the light of his development policies and his keeping the law and order situation under control. Young voters admire economic policies rather than secularism or appeasement of minorities, irrespective of the community or religion they belong to. The Congress could take poll management lessons from him. Himachal high The win in Himachal for the BJP too is definitely an eye-opener for the UPA coalition. What is required is the proper realisation of development ideals, be it combating poverty, unemployment, terrorism or inflation. Contrary to politicians beliefs, the public knows and understands this more than any power broker. It is this ideal combination that has helped Dhumal and Modi sweep the elections. Himachal corruption and wrong seat distribution, along with inefficient top local leadership from the PCC President downwards, and poor organisation both in the party and the youth Congress were the other factors. There was too much interference from central high command who are not in touch with ground realities. Soft hearts First it was Robert Vadra who played good Samaritan on the roads. He is joined by Rahul Gandhi. Last week he offered his car to a doctor, who was hurt, outside Ashoka Hotel, to get to a hospital. A Santro car hit an Indica, which then hit a pedestrian, Dr Shah, from the side. In August this year, Robert Vadra had also helped an accident victim, a motorcyclist, by calling the Tughlak Road police. He even went to see him at
AIIMS.
|
| 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 | |
