The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Judging themselves
Case for foolproof selection

THE UPA Government’s refusal to promote three high court chief justices, as recommended by the collegium headed by the Chief Justice of India, is bound to kick off a controversy. According to reports, the Prime Minister’s Office has returned the file to the CJI “for reconsideration”. The seniority of those recommended for promotion is not the only issue involved. The Law Ministry has raised the question of representation from six states — Madhya Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand and Sikkim — in the Supreme Court. Besides, there is no woman judge. In the present scheme of things, the collegium’s decision on judicial appointments is binding on the government. Small wonder that Union Law Minister H.R. Bharadwaj had said recently that the collegium system had “failed” and that the present method of appointment to the higher judiciary must be scrapped.

Whatever may be the arguments for and against the collegium system, there is no denying that there is no foolproof method of selection of judges with due focus on merit and integrity. Recent examples of judicial misconduct, corruption and nepotism are a matter of shame and disgrace for the entire country. While people still hold judges in high esteem, these examples underline the failure of the system.

Clearly, reverting to the pre-1993 system of appointment is not the answer to the current mess. Rather, it will exacerbate the problem. Since this and the collegium method have both failed to respond to the challenges, constitutional and legal experts would do well to examine an alternative method of selection that would take care of all aspects like the seniority of judges, giving due representation to the states, women and those belonging to the reserved categories. The National Judicial Council (NJC) could play an important role in this regard. Indeed, Mr Bharadwaj had hinted at setting up the NJC for examining complaints against judges for misconduct. Why not make use of the NJC for judicial appointments as well? Of course, retired judges and judicial experts, too, could be included in it for fair and objective selection of judges.

Wedding shots
Horrifying practice has taken many lives

WEDDING festivities at a Moga marriage venue turned into mourning on Sunday when a drunk guest accompanying the groom fired off a gun, killing one person and leaving another with bullet wounds. While it is yet to be confirmed whether it was just an accidental shot or pre-planned murder, it is a fact that gunshots are fired in many marriages as if they are some kind of firecrackers. Many people have been killed or injured in such freak mishaps, including well-known Punjabi singer Dilshad Akhtar. There is a ban on the odious practice, but it is rarely implemented, especially in rural areas. There is a virtual competition between the boy’s and the girl’s side as to who fires more bullets. That these are expensive is hardly a restraining factor. Rather, the big money spent on them is considered a barometer of affluence. What is true of Punjab is also true of Haryana and the neighbouring areas of Uttar Pradesh.

But when such incidents become a threat to life and limbs, there is need to take them very seriously. It should be the responsibility of marriage palaces to ensure that firearms cannot be sneaked in. Arms licenses are given for protection, not for using the weapons irresponsibly as some kind of toys.

That brings one to the larger issue of huge expenses incurred on solemnising weddings. Such wasteful expenditure is vulgar even among those who can afford it. It is simply unpardonable among those who take loans for doing so. Unfortunately, that too is as common as firing gunshots at weddings. Many farmers take loans for buying agricultural implements but use it for solemnising impressive weddings of their wards. When they cannot pay back, they even commit suicide. The community leaders should play a constructive role and eradicate this practice for the larger good of society.

Thought for the Day

What I want is men who will support me when I am in the wrong.
— Lord Melbourne

ARTICLE

Obama in White House
Towards a new phase in US black policy
by S. Nihal Singh

TO grasp the significance of Mr Barack Obama's historic victory in the US presidential election, one has to go back to America's past — not even the past when whites kept slaves and preached equality, as Thomas Jefferson did, but the more recent past. The past of the late fifties, for instance, when I had ventured into the Deep South to experience the flavour of the rampant discrimination against Negroes, as they were then called, that existed.

It was in September 1957 - the days of the trouble in Little Rock, Arkansas, over the admission of black students. In New Orleans, the blacks had their own restaurants and shops and they sat at the back in buses. The whites and blacks lived for the most part in watertight compartments. The people were sullen whereas elsewhere in America they would have been chirpy. There were two black girls waiting on tables in the whites-only restaurant (I having been co-opted into the white race) and they moved about sorrowfully.

Travelling to Montgomery, Alabama, I went to a mass meeting held in one of the parish churches. "A very self-conscious young Negro — he could not have been over 30 — rose to speak", I had written then. "He was very concerned about the crease of his trousers and constantly shifted his weight from one foot to the other. His hands were plunged in his jacket pockets. He made a clever speech - something one would expect to hear at an after-dinner Rotary meeting - asking Negroes not to be intimidated by the whites though they should not take recourse to violence".

Imagine my surprise when I discovered that the young man who spoke was the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. I called at his office the next day. He came out of a meeting and said he had a bad cold and would go home. But he stayed on for half an hour chatting and joking with his secretary and saw a Hollywood producer the same day. I thought it strange that he would not exchange views with an Indian reporter — any Indian reporter — when he said he drew inspiration for his movement from Mahatma Gandhi.

My disappointment with King, who later acquired an iconic status with his famous "I have a dream" speech in Washington, DC, before his tragic assassination, was unmitigated by the atmosphere in Montgomery, which I found oppressive. Along the way in the train journey from New Orleans, I had seen signs saying "Colored Lunch" - I did not know that lunch could be coloured. And Montgomery looked like a city of the dead. The blacks walked about and stood at bus stands grim and silent. The whites went about their work swollen-faced. They had tragic faces.

Having experienced a slice of life in America's Deep South in the late fifties, I could well understand why the Reverend Jesse Jackson was publicly and unabashedly weeping with joy on witnessing Mr Obama's win. Twice, he had symbolically had a shot at the presidency as an Independent without hope of success, and here he was experiencing the impossible pleasure of seeing a fellow black conquer his opponent and the American system to give his black brethren a victory most felt they would never see in their lifetime. The Reverend Jackson's earlier crude and derogatory remarks against Mr Obama apparently did not impair the pastor's sense of exaltation although some American comment painted the emotional moment in a lurid light. For the ordinary black, the Obama victory was an almost religious experience.

However, there were striking contrasts between the two blacks' attempts at winning the presidency. The Reverend Jackson was contesting the presidency as a black man poking a finger in the eye of the majority white race for the discrimination and miseries his race was suffering, exercising the newly-acquired empowerment to cast the vote. Mr Obama was fighting within the system, which comprised different races. He went beyond being a black to promise change. Given the advantages he had stacked up and the unpopularity of the Bush presidency, his margin of victory against his Republican rival John McCain was not all that great.

Figures prove that race did play a part in the election. The overwhelming majority of blacks came out in his support, as did the young. But a greater proportion of the whites in older age groups voted for Mr McCain because he was not black. In the end, Mr Obama won because he had energised his constituency, made race almost irrelevant as far as the young and first-time voters were concerned and convinced a majority of the better educated whites that the change he promised was genuine.

The blacks embraced Mr Obama as one of them although strictly speaking he is of mixed race and did not come from the slave stock. His mother was white, his father from Kenya and he had an unusual upbringing, with schooling in Indonesia. His father left his mother, who was to die young, and he was brought up by his white grandparents in Hawaii, his grandmother dying of cancer just before his electoral triumph. His wife Michelle though is more representative of America's blacks.

Apart from his own historic triumph - and America's triumph in making it possible — Mr Obama is signalling a new phase in black politics and thinking in the United States. He is implicitly telling his fellow blacks that they should leave behind the feeling of victimhood and should pull themselves up to strive to do better; that it is as often laziness and worse, rather than the system, that is at fault. Mr Obama himself took the difficult road of community service and politics, instead of becoming a prosperous black professional or businessman, given his elite educational credentials.

The sense of wonderment among the black community over seeing a black in the White House still endures. Indeed, for the blacks, the night of his victory will be passed on from one generation to the next as the day the slaves finally broke their chains. The blacks will continue to live for a considerable time in greater deprivation than the whites, but they are already a few inches taller. As one who saw their plight and suffering some four decades ago, I can share the blacks' sense of wonder.

MIDDLE

Life is a marathon
by Pramod K. Chaudhari

THEY came, they saw and they conquered the world with their indomitable will. These brave souls on wheelchair impressed everybody, including yours truly, who had come to participate in the Delhi Half Marathon. Life itself is a marathon for the uniquely abled.

Like last year this year also, I spread word among my lifelong friend and marathoner O.P. Raheja to join feet. He was only too willing. We started practising for the endurance run almost two months before the big day. On the D-day we made tracks for the place where the marathon was to be run.

All the world and his wife seemed to be there. It was a different starry world. Many celebrities from Bollywood graced the occasion. Adding to the star appeal were Rahul Bose, Ajay Devgan, Kapil Dev and Olympian Vijender Kumar. Kareena Kapoor was the cynosure of all eyes.

Some were there for money, some for a cause and some just for fun. Two of our younger friends — Sandeep and Puneet — were there just for fun though they completed the race quite fast.

Braving the slight chill, over 25,000 turned up for the run. It was a riot of colours as runners, including a blind man, raced together to make the event a never-to-be-forgotten experience.

The cross section of participants was mind-boggling. From a runner dressed as soldier to male models promoting a product to senior citizens with walking sticks in their hands. It was indeed unity in diversity.

As we started and ran for nearly 12 km, I got somewhat tired and slowed down. My fellow-marathoner OP asked me the reason. I pointed towards a roadside board which bore the message, “Go slow, work in progress.” We had a hearty laugh.

Again after a while, he saw a traffic cop and advised me, “Don’t stop. He will challan you.” Though tired we soldiered on, joking on the way to laugh away our tiredness.

I saw many runners in colourful costumes. Some were wearing the masks of lions, bears and other animals.

I saw a runner on skates to boot, holding a long flute in his hands and skating away to glory. There was a girl running bare-foot.

After running for more than two hours, I became marathon-weary and chanted ‘Hey Ram’, ‘Hey Ram’. As I said it a couple of times, a fellow-marathoner mouthed, “Aapki Ramlila ab tak khatm nahin hui” (your Ramlila has not ended so far). He seemed to be the same old guy who thus greeted me last year. Auld lang syne!

On the way there were girls and boys dancing on stage set after distance of about five km. Their dance with pop music in the background was quite rejuvenating.

Irrespective of my failing energy, I kept running as the game was worth the candle. I cherish its memory throughout the year. Only one km was left. Waving and smiling I ran, to the claps and cheers of onlookers and finished the run.

OPED

Russian power play
Prime Minister Putin remains lead actor
by Megan K. Stack

THE question has all but disappeared from Russian discourse after months of debate: Who is in charge, Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin or President Dmitry Medvedev?

It's been nearly a year since Putin, faced with the end of his presidency, endorsed his long-loyal underling to succeed him. The speculation that once rattled around the capital after Putin restyled himself as prime minister -- whether the two men would clash; whether Medvedev would try to eclipse his onetime mentor -- has fallen away.

These days, there is a broad perception that Putin remains the dominant politician. Analysts variously describe Medvedev as a spokesman, a yes-man or, more generously, a just-slightly junior partner in Russia's vertical rule.

This is all gleaned from political body language, of course. Few can say with any certainty who gives the orders behind closed doors — and many Russians argue that it's an irrelevant question. In public, the two leaders operate in almost flawless tandem, as two complementary arms of the power structure built by Putin.

The past few weeks, as Medvedev pushed Parliament to prolong the presidential term and doled out steely threats to counter American plans for missile defense, he appeared even more Putinesque than Putin himself — more hostile toward America, more enthusiastic about alliances with anti-American governments in Venezuela and Cuba, and less concerned with the niceties of constitutional preservation.

"Medvedev has made himself even more harsh," said Lilia Shevtsova, an analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center. "He's following the logic of Russian power. He has to look macho and demonstrate his muscle, especially having Putin in the background, continuing to call the shots."

It was Medvedev who, during his state of the nation speech last week, unveiled plans to change the constitution. Explaining that the Parliament and Kremlin need "enough time" to "maintain a high level of authority" and carry out complicated development plans, he proposed lengthening the presidential term from four to six years and drawing out service in the ruling party-dominated Parliament from four to five years. He also suggested granting more power to Parliament to oversee the government.

These are not fresh ideas. The proposed changes are a resurrection of a plan that was championed in the twilight of Putin's presidency by some of his most ardent supporters, who pushed him to amend the constitution to stay in the Kremlin longer.

At the time, Putin demurred. The Russian Constitution was sacrosanct, he insisted, and should not be altered. Now it is Medvedev who is pushing the changes — and Putin who's staying in the background, while telling reporters he supports the amendments.

Some in Moscow speculate that the two men are laying the groundwork for Putin's extended return to the Kremlin; Medvedev has made it plain that the lengthier term would not apply to his own rule.

Others argue that it doesn't matter which of the two men occupy the presidency.

"I don't think the investigation into who's the leader in this duet is relevant," said Garry Kasparov, former chess champion and leading opposition figure. "The core message is both for a Russian audience and for the West: They're saying, `We are staying. Forget about it; we'll decide between us who's in charge.' "

The proposed changes carry undeniable gravitas, marking the first time the post-Soviet Russian Constitution has been amended since its adoption in 1993. But the amendments are racing through the usually laborious legislature — the first reading was heard last week in the State Duma, the lower house of Parliament.

The changes are expected to meet little resistance in Parliament, which is stacked with Putin loyalists. Still, some eyebrows have been raised even among Putin's supporters.

Ruling party lawmaker Sergei Markov said that criticism of the amendments as vehicles to harden the duo's hold on power were "partly true, because really it's an increase in power."

"It's a change in the constitution with unclear, uncertain purposes," he said. "I think eight years is enough for any president to change the country. It's all tactical, and that's my major point of criticism — I think to change the constitution for some small, tactical things, it's not too reasonable."

Markov argued that Medvedev's eagerness to change the constitution is rooted in uncertainty over shifting global dynamics, especially Russian wariness of America in the wake of its war with U.S.-backed Georgia. By ruling longer, he argued, Medvedev hoped to create greater stability.

Medvedev already has signaled that he's ready to play tough with Washington, threatening to deploy short-range Iskander missiles in the far western Russian enclave of Kaliningrad in response to U.S. deployment of a missile-defense shield in Eastern Europe. He also has blamed the United States for the global financial crisis.

"These are initiatives of tandem rule and the continuation of Putin's paradigm of rule," Shevtsova said. "This is a ruling corporation, and within this corporation they can change hats."

— By arrangement with LA Times-Washington Post

Private military schools unwanted
by Maj-Gen (retd) Himmat Singh Gill

THE recent arrest of a serving and retired army officer along with a Sadhvi allegedly in connection with the Malegaon bomb blast case has brought to the centrestage a malaise that seems to have crept into the sacrosanct and apolitical structure of the country's armed forces.

The matter assumes serious proportions when even DCOAS Lt-Gen SPS Dhillon has been constrained to admit that the incident involving a serving Lieutenant-Colonel has hurt the prestige of the Indian Army. That the officer belongs to the Army's Intelligence Corps, the highest custodian of intelligence operations within the service, only adds to the intensity and gravity of the problem that the armed forces are faced with.

While proper investigations will no doubt fix responsibility and punishment where called for, it is the first time that the alleged involvement of Service officers is being investigated by the Anti-Terrorist Squad. This should ring alarm bells for anyone even remotely concerned with the integrity and security of the country.

Charges of conspiracy, training in handling explosives, funding, necessary logistics support for the venture and being present at a congregation where conversion of people of certain faiths to another faith was being advocated by the Sadhvi do indicate a disturbing trend within a section of the serving and retired soldiery.

Possibly misplaced notions of nationalism and religiosity have led some to the path of unidirectional social reformation of a peculiar kind in which certain organisations like Abhinav Bharat and the military school at Nashik may or may not be involved, going by the information available at the moment.

In India, where we have the Home Guards, the National Cadet Corps, the NDA and the IMA, just to name a few, the relevance of having privately run military schools is not understood. Who funds these outfits, for the government surely does not?

Is any monitoring by the government done of what they teach, who are on their faculty, what is the kind of literature and pamphlets they publish, what is their syllabus and who does their yearly audit to ensure that money from unauthorised or anti-national sources does not reach these institutions?

It is also beyond comprehension if a senior serving officer of the Indian Army has attended such meetings and whether such an officer reported this activity and all that had transpired there to his seniors at the first available opportunity.

Such actions of intelligence gathering are, of course, sanctioned at the highest level of command after giving much thought to it. The counter-intelligence wings of our armed forces would do well to institute detailed checks within their own organisations to plug all the loopholes and guard against the presence of moles, which is otherwise a standard practice.

At the same time, the legal position also needs to be looked into as to which kind of societies termed educational in nature can be allowed to operate and which fall under the objectionable category.

Or, for that matter, what is the dividing line between an educational and a religious society? This is important for India where communities run societies and trusts of this kind, and where permission to set up these is easily forthcoming

The other more serious issue is that of one of the Army officers having admitted to meeting Sadhvi Pragya .While in service we would never dream of even getting anywhere near any religious figure of our own or any other community, for a serving soldier's mission and line of national service is well defined.

How and why such things have started happening now is a question that our senior commanders and captains of society, who are politicians, need to ask themselves most urgently.

For politicians to tinker around with the ethos and culture of the armed forces is not to be wise, and any sign of disgruntlement or unhappiness on any perceived or actual injustice needs to be addressed at the first available opportunity.

While it is the right and privilege of a soldier to follow and practise his own faith and that we do in our unit gurdwaras, mandirs and masjids, too much emphasis on religious symbols often deviates from the call of national service and field service duty, where some kind of uniformity is called for.

In the present case, there are already unconfirmed reports in a section of the Press that the firebrand VHP leader, Pravin Togadia, had tried to woo Lt-Col Shrikant Purohit to his fold.

What we are seeing in the Malegaon blast case are, to my mind, manifestations of an overdose of religiosity in a few individuals and some organisations vying for a political base and patronage in today's murky game of politics.

Delhi Durbar
Delegation to Gulf

Recently when Dr Manmohan Singh was to go to Oman and Qatar on his visit to the Gulf region, he made it a point to include Murli Deora in his delegation, realising that there would be intense discussions with the two countries on oil and gas.

However, Deora at the last minute decided to drop out of the PM’s delegation, the reason being his son’s marriage. When Dr Manmohan Singh was informed about this, he called up Deora in Mumbai and gave him his piece of mind and ordered him to join the trip on November 8. Deora was left with no alternative. So the minister, after the wedding on November 8, rushed to join the PM’s party in the Gulf.

Let’s do it for Punjab

It is rare for Punjab to get good investment from the private sector in higher education. Four leading business families hailing from Punjab have joined hands and funded the setting up of the internationally acclaimed International School of Business (ISB) at Mohali.

All the four — Rakesh Bharti Mittal of the Bharti group, Sunil Kant Munjal and Pawan Kant Munjal of the Hero group, Analjit Singh of Max India and Atul Punj of Punj Lloyd — jointly committed a funding of Rs 200 crore — Rs 50 crore each for the project.

At a function to announce the launch, they declared that they were determined to "do it" for Punjab — the homeland of "our ancestors". The four had clearly got their emotions and business sense right.

Punjab minister Bikram Singh Majithia wished success for the four families as well as the IBS, calling it "a turning point" for the state. The four business houses have been named as the "founding supporters" of the project.

Vigyan Bhavan unsafe?

Most high-profile international summits are now being organised at a five-star hotel in the Capital. Last month, the IBSA Summit, at which Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Presidents of Brazil and South Africa were present, was held at Taj Palace Hotel.

Last week, the BIMSTEC Summit of the leaders of India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal and Bhutan too was organised at the same hotel. This led to traffic snarls at various places, particularly in the busy Dhaula Kuan area.

When an official was asked why the government was hosting these summits at the hotel instead of Vigyan Bhavan, the usual venue, he had this to say: “We have to take everything into account, particularly security of the leaders.’’

Wonder if Vigyan Bhavan is no longer safe for such events from the security point of view!

Contributed by Bhagyashree Pande, Ajay Banerjee and Ashok Tuteja

Corrections and clarifications

n The news-item “UK closes door on asylum seekers” published on November 6 was repeated in the edition of November 8 with a slightly different heading. The error is regretted.

n The last lines of the article “GPS shows the way” (Nov 7) should have read: “What was designed to make smart bombs more accurate is today being used to make sure that children can find their way home. That is human ingenuity”.

n The opening line of the Spectrum article on B R Chopra on November 16 should have mentioned that the late Mr Chopra started his career as a film journalist.

n The expression in the story “Classmate remembers B R Chopra” (November 7) should have been ‘hale and hearty’, and not ‘hail and hearty.

n The use of the word “acing” in the headline on the sports page on November 14, “After acing Test, India ready for ODI exam”, was not correct.

n The first paragraph of the lead story on the sports page on November 15 reported that India had beaten England in cricket in Rajkot, but the margin of victory was not given.

n The headline ‘Third blast in as many days’ (Nov 17) should have been ‘Three blasts in as many days’.

Despite our earnest endeavour to keep The Tribune error-free, some errors do creep in at times. We are always eager to correct them.

We request our readers to write or e-mail to us whenever they find any error. We will carry corrections and clarifications, wherever necessary, every Tuesday.

Readers in such cases can write to Mr Amar Chandel, Deputy Editor, The Tribune, Chandigarh, with the word “Corrections” on the envelope. His e-mail ID is amarchandel@tribunemail.com.

H.K. Dua
Editor-in-Chief