 |
|
Olympian blunder Pay more for wheat |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Maha tamasha
Problems before Pakistan
Apna Bhaiya will wear khaki
Gender matters The journey of the Olympic torch Inside Pakistan
|
Olympian blunder CHINA saw the Olympics as a godsend to showcase its emergence as a potential super power. This country of over a billion people did everything possible to successfully bid for the Games this year. For nearly a decade China has been spending billions of dollars to make the Beijing Olympics the most spectacular the world has ever seen. Ultramodern stadiums, swimming pools and swanky apartment buildings have been built for thousands of sportspersons, journalists and officials who would descend on the Chinese capital for the greatest sporting spectacle on the planet. Everything was going apace and according to China’s plans until the Tibetans protested in Lhasa and the Chinese government cracked down on them. With each passing day, pressure on the media reporting from Tibet was stepped up. The strongarm tactics the Chinese authorities have resorted to have only added fuel to the fire lit by the Tibetan nationalists. Today, the media the world over report more about the protests the Tibetans and their supporters organise, than about the journey of the Olympic torch. Never before has the flame aroused anger and protest as in Paris where thousands of people congregated not to cheer the procession but to jeer at it. It is a telling commentary on the state of affairs that the torch was extinguished two times and it had to be taken inside a heavily protected bus to keep it safe. Given the pro-Tibet sentiment in Europe, more such scenes can be expected as it traverses its way to Beijing. Small wonder that there are reports that China may even abandon the torch’s procession. The way things are happening, China can be sure of one thing - the Games will not be a cause for exuberant celebration in Beijing as it had planned. The French President may not be the only one to remain away from the inaugural. The International Olympic Association has asked China to handle the Tibetan question in a more humane manner. In the days to come, China will have to brace up to face harsher criticism of its handling of Tibet. By now it would have known how much support the Dalai Lama and his cause enjoy in the democratic world. In fact, the Games have given the Tibetans an opportunity to build public opinion against the systematic destruction of their culture in Tibet. At this rate, China will have reason to rue its decision to bid for Olympics. The mega-event has opened a wound China does not know how to heal.
|
|
Pay more for wheat Although
Union Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar has remained non-committal on the demand for bonus on wheat, he has left the door ajar saying he will put up before the Cabinet the farmers’ demand and facts brought to his notice by the Punjab and Haryana chief ministers. During his visit to Chandigarh on Monday, he tried political goal-scoring by pointing out that while the UPA government had raised the minimum support price for wheat by 59 per cent in four years, the MSP increase effected by the NDA in contrast was only 14.5 per cent in five years. This was as unnecessary as Mr Parkash Singh Badal’s counter-claim that, unlike the Manmohan Singh government, the NDA had kept the MSP of wheat above its global prices. What is important is farmers should get suitable returns on the sale of their produce. The farmers’ case has become stronger after the damage to crops by the recent rain, hailstorm and high wind. Despite official claims, the FCI may not be able to procure sufficient wheat for the public distribution system unless it relaxes quality norms and buys wheat at the market rates. While big farmers can afford to hold back stocks on their own or on behalf of traders, small farmers are forced to dispose of their produce at whatever price is available. The government also loses revenue as big farmers and traders strike deals outside mandis. Since the Centre has raised the wheat MSP to Rs 1,000 a quintal and also come out with a massive loan waiver, it is now for the chief ministers of Punjab and Haryana also to contribute something more concrete for the farmers’ welfare than an expression of sympathy at their plight and repeated pleas to the Centre for a bonus on wheat. The Centre as well as the states can jointly pay a reasonable bonus on wheat to bring the wheat procurement prices on a par with the prevailing market rates.
|
|
Maha tamasha This
is the kind of script a Bollywood pulp churner would love: Two “heroes”, each a villain in the eyes of the fans of the other; first, they have a sort of proxy bash; then the real McCoys rise on stage and everyone enjoys the drama. It dawns on the audience that they were not beating each other but actually baiting to hug each other; everything is all bhai-bhai. Such nice tamasha, no? Tamasha is a very Maharashtrian form of entertainment. And, with his stellar role, Amitabh Bachchan has proved that he is no less Maharashtrian than Bal Thackeray, that supreme, self-appointed custodian of all things Maharashtrian. In the climactic scene, Amitabh delivers his dialogue in Marathi and Thackeray pronounces that (Maharashtrian) Amitabh is a superstar who belongs to the whole country; just like Maharashtra belongs to the whole country. What a pity that such a thriller had to be played out on the public stage, with only parts on the screen and that too the small screen. The script is terrific. The Shiv Sena supremo’s paper, Saamna takes a dig at Amitabh by pointing out how Rajnikanth, originally from Karnataka, took a stand in support of Tamil Nadu on the Hogenakkal issue; he rooted for the state to which he owed his superstardom. Shouldn’t Amitabh be doing the same for Maharashtra? Thackeray is not an intolerant character, and Saamna, supposedly being fiercely independent, is free to publish whatever its editor chooses, Bal Thackeray being one of its captive readers! The good thing was that the implied criticism gave Amitabh a chance to appear on a newly launched Marathi channel and proclaim, in Marathi, his loyalty to Maharashtra. The baritone voice was certainly his, but we don’t know who wrote the script. Thackeray, too, wrote an editorial in Saamna praising Amitabh and saying he should not be dragged into regional disputes; and, that they were family friends. Now everyone is happy, all the protagonists have had their 15 minutes of fame. Thackeray has emerged as a ‘statesman’ and Amitabh can now look forward to more offers for endorsement and as Maharashtra’s brand ambassador. The new Marathi channel has also made its mark. The villains are only those who are still complaining.
|
|
Knowledge and human power are synonymous. — Francis Bacon
|
Problems before Pakistan
PAKISTAN of today is what India was in 1977 when it emerged from the authoritarian rule of Indira Gandhi. People in Pakistan feel that it is a new independence as people in India felt then. The Pakistanis are more effusive because they see the melting down of military rule which had been there for nearly 50 years out of their 60-year period of independence. The first job of the government in Delhi after the Emergency was to dismantle the structure Indira Gandhi had put up. The new government in Islamabad has resolved to do the same: dismantle the structure that President Pervez Musharraf, then also the Chief of Army Staff, had created during the Emergency. On top of the agenda of Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani’s government is the restoration of some 60 judges who had refused to take oath of allegiance to President Musharraf. The reinstatement of the judges does not seem to present much difficulty because the 30-odd judges in their place will be absorbed. The hitch is over the reappointment of Chief Justice Itifkhar Mohammad Chaudhry. Another Chief Justice is already in place, presiding over the Supreme Court. If he does not step down, how can Justice Chaudhry be appointed? Yet, his reinstatement has been the issue over which the lawyers fought a 40-day-long battle. In fact, the agitation woke up civil society which can rightly take credit for stoking the fires of revolt against Mr Musharraf. Lawyers and journalists are the ones who have won Pakistan new independence. Justice Chaudhry, after house arrest for four months, is already touring the country. A reception at Quetta in his honour was breathtaking. He has become a symbol of defiance. There is the ultimatum of one month to the government from the day of its formation to reinstate him and other judges. The government will probably bring a resolution in Parliament to restore the status quo ante. It has no other option after Mr Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Muslim League (N), and Mr Asif Ali Zardari, co-chairman of the Pakistan People’s Party, have committed to the lawyers’ demand. There are bound to be repercussions on Mr Musharraf who, as rumour has it, may be tried for treason. But there is hardly anybody to defend him. By giving support to Prime Minister Gilani at the time of confidence motion, President Musharraf’s party, the Muslim League (Qaid), has also turned its back on him. The second priority before the government is how to restore the pre-eminence of the civilian order over the military. That the army officers posted at key civil positions are being recalled is a welcome step. But they have been posted right to the village level. All of them will have to go back to the barracks. Yet, this will not sort out the bigger question of supremacy. Mr Nawaz Sharif’s stand is that the status of the military should be like the one that prevails in India. Mr Zardari appears to have different ideas, but he too cannot afford to have the military overlooking the shoulders of a civilian government. When Benazir Bhutto was the Prime Minister, the practice was that she had to go to the military headquarters to discuss matters which included political ones. What is the position now? It would be interesting to know where the meeting between Prime Minister Gilani and Chief of Army Staff Parvez Kayani took place. These details are important to know about a country where the roots of the Army are deep and where policies are formulated after consulting its top brass. Returning to the barracks, as Mr Gilani has suggested, meant that the military would have to be apolitical, a tradition or trait not known in Pakistan. Will the military agree to play a second fiddle when it has practically ruled the country for some 50 years? Another task before the new government is the freedom of the media which suffered hardships during the agitation for the restoration of democracy. The regulatory authority has to be demolished, not transferred from the Home Ministry to the Information Ministry. A partial relaxation has no relevance. The Press has to be free because it is one of the pillars on which a democratic set-up rests. With Ms Sherry Rehman as Minister for Information, the media should have no fears because she has been a leading journalist herself. The jihadis may pose a problem to Pakistan because President Musharraf had encouraged them to be the law unto themselves and train their guns against India. It was the operation against Lal Masjid at Islamabad that infuriated them and made military as their target. The jihadis would differentiate between the new government and President Musharraf and wait to see how Gilani treats them. The same thing holds good for the Taliban operating in the territory between Afghanistan and the NWFP. Mr Nawaz Sharif was quite categorical before the visiting US dignitaries that Pakistan would like to talk to the Taliban directly. Mr Gilani has endorsed the stand. The problem is not of the Taliban wanting certain facilities but of establishing a country of their own. Talks can pacify militants, not insurgents. Both have different targets, the Taliban belong to the latter category. What Pakistan faces in every sphere is the disrespect for law and values. I do not think that political parties can revive values even if they pool their strength because they violate them every day. They can probably instil faith in the rule of law. They must first know how they lost it. The best way is to appoint a commission to find out the wrongs done during the emergency imposed by President Musharraf. India, too, went over the exercise and found to its horror that the topmost officers had surrendered to unconstitutional methods out of fear. Indira Gandhi returned to power before the guilty could be punished, but the Gilani government has all the time to punish those who were responsible for the excesses, such as the house arrests of judges and a few others. If Pakistan is to preserve the fundamental values of a democratic society every person must display a degree of vigilance and willingness to sacrifice. Without the awareness of what is right and a desire to act according to what is right, there may be no realisation of what is wrong. This holds good as much for Pakistan as for India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and
Nepal.
|
Apna Bhaiya will wear khaki
It happened some 14 years ago. A boy from an insignificant village in Eastern Uttar Pradesh made it to the Indian Police Service — the first from there. That was I. The results were published in an English daily. I had not done anything prior to this to deserve mention in any newspaper. Needless to say I bought several copies of that day’s edition from the nearest town some 7 km away. I have preserved the long list of 700 names till date. I became a celebrity. My father’s cousin is a neta of sorts. He contested the village panchayat elections some years ago but lost miserably. He was the happiest man that fateful day and what followed later. He bought several kilos of mithai and distributed it in the village. After all, his dear nephew had become a cop. The following day we had a feast at home. Overnight, I became the hero of the family. I discovered cousins I had never known and was hugged by strangers who claimed to be my close relatives. I also made several new friends that evening. Many of them came uninvited. A lavish dinner was organised, hosted by my uncle. In the midst of it all he announced: “Apna Bhaiya is soon joining the police. I am sure with all our good wishes he will become a Daroga one day.” The congregation said a loud Amen. The local Thana cops came calling. They even saluted me. Neta Chacha’s chest swelled with pride. I left the village some days later to tie some loose ends before my date of joining. On return my beaming uncle greeted me. He exclaimed: “We are already reaping the benefits of your selection. The local policewallahs came to verify your antecedents. And guess what? They did not demand a single rupee from us! Before leaving they said — your nephew will surely be our boss someday. I was overwhelmed and gave them two hundred rupees for mithai shithai. Cops should never go empty-handed. After all we are also part of them now!!” Finally, I was ready to leave my insignificant existence behind forever. Over a hundred persons showed up to see me off at the railway station. Among them were two railway policemen. For the first time in my life I did not see coolies argue over payments. I was seated comfortably. The entourage ensured that all my co-travellers and soon enough the whole trainload of people became aware that this village bumpkin was on his way to become someone important. As the engine blew the whistle, my dear uncle hugged me tight and said: “Man lagakar training karna. Khoob gaaliyan seekh ke aana! I am sure they will teach you all the choicest abuses in your police training!” During the journey I heard only nice things. My fellow travellers offered help wherever and whenever. One even mentioned that he had a daughter of marriageable age! It seemed as if I had finally arrived in
life!!
|
Gender matters Soon after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005, we had the opportunity to point out that some lacunae were still left in the law of succession that required to be removed. In our article, “The Hindu Succession Act: Ending gender bias” (The Sunday Tribune, April 9, 2006), we stated that to create parity between the sons and daughters, the amending Act had introduced four new heirs in Class I of the Schedule. While doing so permutatively, the legislature missed two heirs, namely the son of a predeceased son of a predeceased daughter and the son of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased son, to the disadvantage of the daughter. In our view, there seemed to be no rational for this omission. The Law Commission of India has now taken note of this omission in its 204th Report presented to the Union Minister for Law and Justice by the Chairman of the Commission on February 5, 2008, and recommended the incorporation of the said two heirs in Class I by removing them along with four others from Class II of the Schedule. The Commission calls this omission as a part of “legislative inadvertences,” which need rectification. However, on our further close reading of the provisions of the amending Act 2005, it is revealed that the error of excluding the two heirs is not conceptual or substantive, but simply calculative. The two heirs are already included under sub-section 3 of new section 6 of the Act by the legislature, but at the drafting stage these were somehow omitted to be included amongst Class I heirs via section 7 of the Amending Act. The Law Commission in its present Report has made two other proposals to amend the Hindu Succession Act 1956 as amended by the Act of 2005. One of these relates to ‘Father’s widow.’ In this respect, the proposal to recommend is on two counts. On one count it is purely clarifying in nature, inasmuch as the term ‘father’s widow’ in Entry VI of Class II of the Schedule refers to the step-mother of the deceased male Hindu, as distinguished from the term ‘mother’ included in Class I, which refers to his own real mother. Thus, this recommendation merely makes it express what is otherwise clearly implied. On second count, the proposal is made for up-gradation of step-mother (termed as ‘father’s widow’) from Entry VI to Entry II. The reason adduced by the Commission for this shift is that “if mother of the intestate takes her share as Class I heir, then nothing will remain for the step-mother, if any, to succeed.” This reasoning in our view is highly misplaced, because, apart from several other reasons that might have initially prompted the legislature to place the step-mother after the persons closely related to the deceased (both descendents and collaterals), under section 8 of the Act that deals with the general rules of succession it is clearly stipulated that the property would devolve upon the heirs specified in Class II of the Schedule only if ‘there is no heir of Class of I.’ The third, and perhaps the most significant, proposal made by the Commission in its current Report relates to the relocation of the position of ‘Father’ of the deceased. In this respect, the Commission has rightly recommended that the ‘Father’ as an heir should be shifted from Class II (Entry I) to the category of ‘preferential heirs’ included in Class I of the Schedule. The argument advanced by the Commission is mainly two-fold. Firstly, ‘Father’ is certainly a close relative than anyone else placed in Class II, and there seems to be no reason not to prefer him over the third generation persons remotely connected with the deceased in the matters of succession. Secondly, if it is the paramount legal obligation of the children to maintain their parents, say, under the recently enacted “Senior Citizens (Maintenance, Protection and Welfare) Act, 2007,” it would indeed be logical to include ‘father’ along with ‘mother’, who is already placed in Class I – the class of preferential heirs. Pursuant to this proposal, the Commission has further proposed to recommend for the revision of distribution of property among heirs in Class I of the Schedule. This of course requires the revision of the various rules as laid down in Section 10 of Act of 1956. Inter alia, the Commission has proposed to recommend the incorporation of a rule whereby the “mother and father, if both survive at the intestate’s death, shall take between them together, one share.” Such a proposal, however, in our view, is regressive in character. It shrinks the share of the mother to one-half in presence of the father. Do we wish to demean her dignity or lower her status as mother while raising the status of father as an heir? This is not done even in the case of partition between the father and the son(s). If in the Hindu joint family governed by Mitakashara law partition takes place between the father and his sons, the mother takes an equal share along with the sons. In our submission, therefore, the mother should continue to take one share despite the elevation of father from Class II to Class I, who should of course also be given one share quite independently of the mother. For preventing the pervasive discrimination prevailing against women in relation to laws regulating inheritance and succession of property amongst the members of a joint Hindu family, what is really required is not just making daughters as coparceners. This, unwittingly perhaps, upsets the existing arrangement of the family without providing its viable substitute. Here the problem is not to be visualised in terms of ‘patriarchy’ versus ‘matriarchy’ but equitable division of patrimony without disturbing or destroying the peace, order and understanding of the joint family. The writer is a former professor of law and UGC Emeritus Fellow,
Panjab University
|
|
The journey of the Olympic torch THE ceremony played out on the streets of Paris on Monday did not originate in ancient Greece, nor even in the 19th century, when the Olympic movement was revived. The entire ritual was devised by a German named Dr Carl Diem, who ran the 1936 Olympics in Berlin. Although he was not a Nazi, and was appointed to run the Olympics before the Nazis came to power, Diem adapted very quickly to the new regime, and ended the war as a fanatical military commander exhorting teenage Germans to die like Spartans rather than accept defeat. Thousands did, but not Diem, who lived to be 80. He sold to Josef Goebbels – in charge of media coverage of the Games – the idea that 3,422 young ‘Aryan’ runners should carry burning torches along the 3,422 km route from the Temple of Hera on Mount Olympus to the stadium in Berlin. It was his idea that the flame should be lit under the supervision of a High Priestess, using mirrors to concentrate the sun's rays, and passed from torch to torch along the way, so that when it arrived in the Berlin stadium it would have a quasi-sacred purity. The concept could hardly fail to appeal to the Nazis, who loved pagan mythology, and saw ancient Greece as an Aryan forerunner of the Third Reich. The ancient Greeks believed that fire was of divine origin, and kept perpetual flames burning in their temples. In Olympia, where the ancient games were held, the flame burnt permanently on the altar of the goddess Hestia. In Athens, athletes used to run relay races carrying burning torches, in honour of certain gods. But the ancient Games were proclaimed by messengers wearing olive crowns, a symbol of the sacred truce which guaranteed that athletes could travel to and from Olympus safely. There were no torch relays associated with the ancient Olympics until Hitler. The route from Olympus to Berlin conveniently passed through Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Austria, and Czechoslovakia – countries where the Nazis wanted to extend their influence. Before long, all would be under German military occupation. In Hungary, the flame was serenaded by gypsy musicians who would later be rounded up and sent to death camps. In Berlin, the flame was carried the last kilometre along Berlin's main boulevard, by a 26- year-old runner named Siegfried Eifrig, who was watched by hundreds of thousands as he transferred the flame to a cauldron on an altar surrounded by vast Nazi flags. Eifrig, amazingly, is still alive, aged 98, and told the BBC this month that carrying the ceremony should be a purely sporting affair. Despite its dark political overtones, the event was an unqualified success for the organisers, immortalised in a propaganda film by the Nazi director Leni Riefenstahl. The ritual has been repeated before each Olympics but not always with such organisational flair. By arrangement with
The Independent
|
|
Inside Pakistan Though
top leaders of the PPP and the PML (N) are giving the impression that there is clear understanding among them about resolving the judges issue, reports suggest that the question of restoration of the judiciary as it existed before the imposition of the emergency on November 3 last year is giving them sleepless nights. The PPP formula, which ignores the case of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, is not acceptable to the PML (N) as it amounts to handling the core issue in accordance with the wishes of President Pervez Musharraf. The PML (N) has been telling the people, particularly the legal fraternity, that any arrangement minus Justice Chaudhry will not get its approval. As Business Recorder says, “The debate is intense and there are clear hints that it is splitting up into those who merely want a parliament resolution followed by an ‘as-you-were on November 2, 2007’, executive order and those who are for the reinstatement but subject to the condition that it would be followed up by a parliamentary scrutiny that may screen out some of the judges, including deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.” The Nation presented a rosy picture by quoting sources close to the leadership of the two parties as disclosing that “the issue of judiciary was almost settled and the decision would be acceptable to all the stakeholders – the lawyers, the political parties, judges and the presidential camp… It would be a win-win situation…” for all those involved. However, few people will believe this till the contentious issue is resolved to the satisfaction of all. United in fear President Musharraf these days is not as assertive as he has been earlier, but he is playing his cards with confidence and in a very calculated manner. It is difficult to believe that he will allow the Yousuf Raza Gilani government to implement its plan of stripping the President of the special powers he enjoys like those relating to sacking a government and dissolving the National and Provincial Assemblies. He may be lying low, but he is still feared by the ruling politicians. The politicians, perhaps, realise that they will be the biggest losers in an atmosphere of heightened tension between the President’s camp and the government. Hence the resolve to remain united despite the differences they have on different issues. Daily Times looks at the situation this way, “The PPP fears the establishment; the establishment fears the PML-N; and the PML-N fears an alliance of the PPP with the establishment. The easiest equation in this three-cornered contest is the alliance of all the political parties at the cost of the establishment… “Today the adage that ‘whoever wants to rule Islamabad first must rule Punjab’ no longer holds. With the establishment backing the PPP, a rebellion in Punjab would be self-damaging” for the PML (N). Mr Nawaz Sharif’s party may be in a dilemma. It is unhappy with the equation President Musharraf has developed with PPP leader Asif Ali Zardari, yet it does not want to do anything that may weaken the ruling coalition, as the President’s camp will the real beneficiary in such a situation. Marginalised Sharif? These are, indeed, the most trying times for Mr Nawaz Sharif. The coalition government in Islamabad with his PML (N) as a major partner is unlikely to accomplish most of the tasks dear to him. Besides the judicial issue on which he is under tremendous pressure for a compromise, there is no possibility of removing President Musharraf as the situation exists today. Mr Sharif wanted the President to be shown the door through impeachment, but this is going to be ignored because of the US factor coming in the way. According to The Nation, “A Cabinet minister is mediating between the government and President Musharraf to reach a consensus over a constitutional amendment that will reduce him to a figurehead following US pressure on the ruling coalition not to impeach the former army general.” What is being described as a “constitutional package” will not touch the Provisional Constitutional Order, as that may have its bearing on the PPP too. As Ghayur Ayub says in an article in The Frontier Post (April 8), “many believe that a conspiracy is being hatched to block the restoration of deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, to keep Musharaf for a full term of five years, and to marginalise Mr Nawaz Sharif and exclude the PML (N) from coalition at the Centre by making a new coalition between the PPP, the ANP, the MQM and the PML (Q). This conspiracy is thought to be hatched by the presidential camp.” Mr Sharif, it seems, will have to take recourse to realpolitik to defeat the designs of President
Musharraf.
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
