|
|
Jyoti Basu: a tall leader
Murder most foul |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Crimes of Headley, Rana Punish the others also for plotting 26/11 WHILE indicting Pakistani-origin US citizen David Coleman Headley (previously called Dawood Gilani) and the Canadian national Tahawwur Hussain Rana for their role in 26/11, the US federal grand jury has provided graphic details about their activities.
Court vs court
About Judy
Return of Iron Curtain
How to handle recession Chatterati
|
Jyoti Basu: a tall leader
THE death of Jyoti Basu marks the end of an era. Arguably the oldest communist leader of the world and one who served the longest as chief minister of a state in India, Basu’s demise is also a big blow to the CPM before it gears up for its most crucial Assembly election in West Bengal next year. Basu had been the Chief Minister of the state for a record 23 years and five months and even after he stepped down in November 2000 because of poor health, he continued to remain fairly active and was a respected voice of the Left. After the debacle suffered by the CPM in the Lok Sabha election last year, he bluntly told his partymen to correct mistakes and reach out to the people. Even at the ripe old age of 95 he continued to attend party meetings and guide the CPM. A disciplined communist till the very end, he did not hold the party to ransom when the CPM refused him permission to accept the offer of the United Front to become the Prime Minister in 1996. But not one to mince his words, he made no secret that he thought the decision was a historic blunder. Born in an upper middle class family, Jyoti Basu allowed himself to be initiated into communism while studying in London. He trained to become a barrister but chose to plunge into politics on his return to India, becoming an MLA in the year 1946. The son of a successful doctor, he twice occupied the chair of the deputy chief minister in 1967 and 1969 before becoming the Chief Minister of West Bengal in 1977. He was a charismatic figure in West Bengal, a mass leader and legions of his admirers swore by his political, oratorial and administrative skills. A man of few words, he, however, often came across as somewhat haughty and aloof and came to be known and feared for his acerbic tongue. His critics, and there were many, however, accused him of doing little or nothing for West Bengal in decades while at the helm. While the state’s first Chief Minister Dr B C Roy was credited with industrialising the state, Basu was blamed for not doing much to take the state forward and also not doing enough to curb bullying and corruption by his partymen. While Pramode Dasgupta and Harekrishna Konar are rightly credited with implementing land reforms in the state after 1977, Basu too shares the credit for steering the administration and for implementing the radical measures without much violence or bloodshed in the early days at Writers’ Building. A pragmatic and flexible communist, he also helped modify the CPM’s rigid opposition to foreign capital. He will be remembered among the tallest leaders of a communist party functioning in a democratic country.
|
|
Murder most foul THE manner in which Satish Shetty, a 39-year-old right to information activist, was murdered in Pune for his campaign against Maharashtra’s land mafia needs to be condemned. He shot to national fame for his fight against certain corrupt land deals in the Mumbai-Pune expressway over a decade ago. Of late, he had been exposing land-grabbing by the powerful and the influential in the picturesque Talegaon-Lonavala belt, a hot tourist destination. As this region has become a favourite of realtors in the state, Shetty earned the mafia’s wrath. The police did little to protect him though he had complained about threats to his life from the mafia which has a lot of political clout. Shetty’s brutal killing is not an isolated incident. It is because of the authorities’ failure to protect the whistleblowers that the country has lost Bihar PWD engineer Yogendra Pandey in Patna (2009), IIM alumni and Indian Oil Corporation manager Manjunath Shanmugam in Lakhimpur Kheri, Uttar Pradesh (2005), social activists Sarita and Mahesh in Shabdo, Bihar (2004) and IIT engineer Satyendra Dubey in Gaya (2003). The Bombay High Court has rightly taken suo motu cognisance of Satish Shetty’s murder and directed the state government and the Director-General of Police to file an affidavit within a week on the measures taken to investigate his murder. A Division Bench consisting of Justice F.I. Rebello and Justice J.H. Bhutia has ruled that it “will not let public-spirited people who approach the high court to espouse public causes to suffer like this.” Indeed, the situation in Maharashtra is grave because Home Minister R.R. Patil has himself admitted that the land mafia is “back in action”. Five persons have been detained in connection with Shetty’s murder but there is need for a thorough probe so that the guilty can be nabbed and punished. Unfortunately, the police track record in protecting the RTI activists is very poor. The killers of Navleen Kumar who exposed Thane’s land mafia are yet to be nabbed. Despite identification, H.S. D’lima’s attackers in Mumbai are still roaming free. Anandini Thakoor and Navin Pandya were attacked last year, but the police is yet to take action on the FIR. What happened to Chief Minister Ashok Chavan’s proposal for a special cell to probe attacks on whistleblowers?
|
|
|
Crimes of Headley, Rana WHILE indicting Pakistani-origin US citizen David Coleman Headley (previously called Dawood Gilani) and the Canadian national Tahawwur Hussain Rana for their role in 26/11, the US federal grand jury has provided graphic details about their activities. The court has established not only their deep involvement in the Lashkar-e-Toiba-planned terrorist strike in Mumbai but also the fact that it was executed by Pakistani nationals with their training camps on the other side of the Indo-Pak divide. Headley and Rana had their bases in Chicago as well as in Pakistani towns. Rana’s First World Immigration Services, which opened an office in Mumbai for massacring 166 innocent persons, must have been getting assistance from the ISI. The LeT could not have succeeded in accomplishing the heinous programme without the ISI’s help. The US jury has not named the ISI, but the Pakistani external intelligence agency must have been involved in what happened in Mumbai because of its close links with the LeT. Much of what the US court has recorded had been reported soon after the arrest of Headley and Rana in October 2009 in Chicago. US intelligence agencies knew of their activities before 26/11 as Headley was found to be working for both the LeT and US agencies. Had the full details been shared with India, the tragedy could have been averted. Unfortunately, the US also did not allow Indian officials to interrogate Headley and Rana. This is not how terrorism can be eliminated. International cooperation is a must in successfully fighting the menace, particularly when Al-Qaida and its associates like the LeT have spread their tentacles in many corners of the world besides the Af-Pak region. At least now the US should put pressure on Pakistan to bring to justice all the culprits involved in 26/11. There must be many more people besides Illiyas Kashmiri and retired major Abdur Rehman, whose names have been given as handlers of the terrorists who caused the mayhem in Mumbai. Pakistan must be made to act according to the details given in the dossiers supplied by India. Punishing only Headley, Rana, Illiyas Kashmiri and Rehman will not be enough.
|
|
|
It matters not how a man dies, but how he lives. The act of dying is not of importance, it lasts so short a time. — Samuel Johnson
|
Court vs court TWO byproducts of the recent judgment of the Delhi High Court on the Right to Information Act deserve to be preserved in the pages of history; the first is the hard proof of existence of judges in the high courts who combine character, competence and courage — thanks to the four learned judges of the Delhi High Court. They have, without fear, shown by example what ought to be the position of a high court in India as envisaged by our Constitution. The second corollary is the dubious distinction of the highest court in the land emerging as a plaintiff before a forum that is, for all practical purposes, subordinate to it. When it comes to dealing with legal problems, even the Supreme Court needs wholesome advice — not just branded ones. If the Supreme Court loses, we the people of India suffer loss of face — hence the need for high content of wisdom in the advice. Technically, the opinion that the CIC’s decision was open to judicial review before a high court is correct, but to advise the Supreme Court to be a plaintiff before a lower forum appears odd because the highest court is driven to a no-win situation. If the high court (the single judge as well as the Bench) were to accept the contention of petitioner Supreme Court — surely that must have been the expectation of the petitioner/appellant — the whole exercise would have been termed as a drama with dialogues scripted in advance. Now that the case has been lost, things are becoming “curiouser” and “curiouser”. The apex court may file an appeal before itself. If these facts were available to Lewis Carroll, the cunning old Fury would have gone beyond “I ’ll be the judge — I ’ll be the jury” — by inserting a line that “whenever I be the plaintiff”. A reference to some background facts is necessary to appreciate whether this litigation was unavoidable. A citizen petitioned the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) attached to the Supreme Court for information on any declaration of assets filed by the hon’ble judges of the Supreme Court and further whether the High Court judges were submitting declarations about their assets to respective Chief Justices in the states. The CPIO in November 2007 advised the applicant citizen that the information sought for was not under the control of the registry of the court. On appeal, the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) directed the CPIO to take recourse to S.6(3) of the RTI Act which expects the CPIO in such a situation to transfer the request to the other “public authority” to furnish the information — in this case “the other public authority” could only be the Chief Justice of India. The CPIO thought it fit to remain silent. In the appeal before the CIC the CPIO took several defences, including this that the the information sought related to a subject matter which was “an in-house exercise” and pertained to material held by the CJI in his personal capacity. It was also submitted that the declarations made by the judges of the Supreme Court had been made over by them to the CJI on a voluntary basis in terms of the 1997 resolution in a “fiduciary relationship”. The Chief Information Commissioner by his order dated 6-1-2009 rejected the contentions and held that the Supreme Court was a “public authority”. The CIC directed the Supreme Court to provide the information asked for — whether the declaration of assets has been filed by the judges of the Supreme Court or not. Was this a grave enough intrusion into the independence of the judiciary to justify driving the apex court to become a petitioner before a high court? A wise and graceful course would have been to simply accept the truth that “we too are bound by law — not above it”. The issues framed for consideration by the Single Judge were as follows: “Whether the CJI is a public authority; “Whether the office of CPIO of the Supreme Court of India is different from the office of the CJI; and if so, whether the Act covers the office of the CJI; “Whether the asset declarations by Supreme Court judges, pursuant to the 1997 Resolution is “information” under the Right to Information Act, 2005; “If such asset declarations are “information” does the CJI hold them in a “fiduciary” capacity, and are they, therefore, exempt from disclosure under the Act; “Whether such information is exempt from disclosure by reason of Section 8(1)(j) of the Act; “Whether the lack of clarity about the details of asset declaration and about their details, as well as lack of security renders asset declarations and their disclosure, unworkable.” Can any of the above issues destroy judicial independence? In fact the judges have declared their assets, and heavens appear to be intact. Before the learned Single Judge could deliver his judgment on July 2, 2009, the judges of the Supreme Court had decided — as is expected of the eminent men — to declare their assets without reservation. In view of this development, the judge of the High Court reportedly advised withdrawal of the writ petition — obviously to avoid any needless precedent. However, the CPIO persisted with the petition and the judgment dismissing the petition followed — another instance of missing timely sound advice. Former Chief Justice of India J.S. Verma publicly advised the Supreme Court not to take up the matter further in appeal and to simply obey the directions with a view to adding grace to the Supreme Court. That was ignored and an appeal was preferred to the Division Bench of the High Court — after the judges of the Supreme Court complied with the operative portion of the judgment of the Single Judge — “on the ground that fundamental questions of law with regard to scope and applicability of the RTI Act with reference to the declaration of assets by the judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court persists and need to be addressed”. A normal litigant would have been admonished for the obduracy — the instant litigant was not ordinary. May we ask, for whose benefit? Are we driven in to an impression that someone in charge of the Supreme Court prefers to work in the dark? The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court nominated two other judges, both highly respected for their competence and character, to join the Full Bench in view of the importance of the litigation — normally such matters are heard by a Bench of two. The Secretary-General of the Supreme Court by now got himself impleaded as appellant. The appeal was dismissed on January 12, 2010, by a unanimous verdict giving no indication of involvement of any complex question of law of earth-shaking consequences, though they on request certified that the case was a fit one to appeal to the Supreme Court. Again as a matter of grace. While the appeal was pending before the Delhi High Court, another issue, another application to disclose the correspondence between the Chief Justice of India and the President/government about an alleged overlooking of some senior judges and appointing junior ones to the Supreme Court cropped up. The Information Officer attached to the Supreme Court or may be the Secretary-General himself, filed a petition — this time before the apex court itself, contending that such information is outside the purview of the RTI Act. The Supreme Court not only entertained the petition, but also stayed the demand for information. The matter is pending — hence no comments about its legitimacy. Surely, this is a more straight-forward course, but are we about to witness an unfortunate tragedy where the proponent is inviting disaster by his own folly? It may be too late in the day to insist that the information relating to the actions of the Supreme Court in its administrative capacity like appointments and transfers are “confidential” — not accessible to the citizens. The public is entitled to know why and on what criteria someone is appointed and another is overlooked — to the naked eyes of laymen, often both the selections as well as the rejection look horribly wrong. The protection available to cabinet papers under S.8(1)(i ) — disclosure after the decision — may be adapted to the Supreme Court also through rules to regulate the flow of information. While framing the rules, it may be remembered that “Well defined and publicly known standards and procedures complement, rather than diminish, the notion of judicial independence. -Sunlight is the best disinfectant”. The quoted portion of the judgment of the Delhi High Court may not be appealed
against.
The writer is Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India.
|
||
About Judy OVER the years, I have come to believe that absolutely nothing happens by chance. People come into your life for a reason – to learn something from you and to teach you a thing or two. Life as I see it is one huge metaphor for learning and teaching. In my life, Judy’s place in that metaphor is unmistakable. When I met Judy 10 years ago, I could never have imagined how deeply I would be impacted by that friendship. It seemed like the most beautiful happening one winter that this breezy girl moved next door. After a few brief meetings, we learned that we shared our birthday! In some inexplicable way, from that moment on, we were drawn into the most delightful friendship. As a new immigrant in the US, Judy’s friendship made a stupendous difference in my life. Between finishing graduate school and finding a job, my mind was inadvertently filled with an ocean of memories. Judy embarked with me on many a fascinating adventure, thereby helping me to sail through each day with a chuckle. Among the first things we did together was to grow patio gardens. Judy, who is a stickler for a clean car would drive to bring the saplings even though it entailed spewing her car with dirt – that being just one instance of her imprint of affection In growing those plants, I began to grow roots in the new country. While in the spring the saplings spread their roots deeper into the flower boxes, our summers were replete with pink lemonade and the smell of the sand. It was during one such summer that with a little help from me, Judy overcame her childhood fear of the water and learned to swim. We laughed about it that Judy, a girl born and raised in a coastal California town, had to take swimming lessons from me, a girl who grew up in the inner plains of North India as far away from the water as one could get! As Judy surged ahead with her swimming, the immigration ordeal seemed to ease for me. Among other things, immigration can make a person practical to a fault. Like when I could not help being smug when on a trip to the grocery store, Judy bought pink roses on impulse and when I enquired who those were for, she replied nonchalantly, “For me.” And I learned as a reflex that even though I was the one writing my dissertation on Toni Morrison, it was Judy who had had it imbibed all along that she was her own “best thing.” About the time that I moved into a house in the suburbs, Judy went to live by the beach where she swam through her share of anguish and elation with a quiet repose when she bravely fought and beat a life-threatening disease and smiled on to meet the love of her life! And now, on a trip to the local pharmacy if I come by a candle with the smell of the distant lilacs, I am sure to buy it and declare, “For me”. And on any sunny day, you can see Judy trying to surf with a composure that is so her. Last we spoke, she said she has yet to ride the waves but she sure is getting there soon. And to that I say, “You go girl! Take on the Pacific and always keep the wind at your
back.”
|
||
Return of Iron Curtain THE fall of the Berlin Wall seemingly brought the cold war to an end. The early twentieth century warnings of dangers to Russia from the counter-revolutionary moves by Poland, Finland and Bulgaria sound plausible in the context of the prevailing conditions of hostility. The recent cooption of Romania and Bulgaria by the US in its strategy to move eastward and establish its global hegemony is the harbinger of a new Cold War in the making. Moreover, the escalation of the
NATO presence on the Black Sea further enhances the US presence in the Baltic region. This move is now
worrisome for the Russians owing to the uncomfortable pressure exerted on its borders with the aim of hedging it from all sides. Interventionist moves by the NATO forces backed by the US indicate a plan to ensure easy access for the war machinery into South West Asia essential for gaining supremacy in the region. Already, American troops have been conducting exercises in Georgia. Plans to build military defence systems within Eastern Europe are also under way. In the past Ukraine and Georgia have experienced American interference in their internal politics. At the centre of this policy is the undying strategy of unilateralism
and hegemony over the entire globe that America has never stopped dreaming about. Although with the demise of the Soviet Union, America did begin to attain the omniscient position of the author of global politics, it has never stopped imagining the conceivable chances of an old antagonist rising from the ashes. The old glory of the Soviet Union with a strong army, a strong economy and even stronger literacy rate has slowly disappeared. To come to grips with the abysmal decline and fall of Russia into a new condition of starvation, disease and poverty, the operation of the logic of the blind laws of market economy have been brought to a halt by
President Putin. Putin stopped the passing of the oil-rich economy into the hands of the oligarchs, a move initially made by Yeltsin, who had virtually become a lackey of the West by offering a tempting and destructive way of life, unthinkingly succumbing to the market hypnosis. His collaboration was so apparent. But this downturn does not obliterate the still existing capability of the
Russian war machinery and its nuclear stockpile. Putin has thrown in the gauntlet by recently testing a long-distance missile and sending a message that that could be directed against Europe if the Americans continue to humiliate Russia as in the case of locating their anti-missile defence shield in Poland and Czechoslovakia, which is clearly aimed at Russia rather than a defense against North Korea as maintained by Washington. It is difficult to imagine the end of belligerence to continue between the two sides with the appearance of the new Iron Curtain – the US and its NATO allies on one side and Russia on the other. Only this time, Russia is without its smaller republics that clamour for alignment with NATO. Obviously, a direct military confrontation goes against the grain of contemporary American foreign policy, but the drive towards stationing large military forces in Georgia and the establishment of bases in the Caspian region is a shrewd move by Washington that intends to put the already weakened Russian nation against the wall. This provocation has incited the people and the military forces in Russia who have now become deeply nostalgic of the socialist past and the days of plenty, a pre-Perestroika era of prosperity and power. “The U.S. forces are now stretched from Norway and several other European countries neighbouring Russia through Turkey, Georgia and three Central Asian states,” according to an intelligence analyst. The recent increase of the NATO forces in the Balkans further creates insecurity for the Russians on its
borders, though it could be merely a psychological tactic to put Russia
in its place. The trial of President Slobodan Milosevic, who stood in the way of the Western advance in the Balkans, continues at The Hague, which is hardly expected to come up with a just verdict considering its allegiance to NATO. The former Yugoslavia lies in fragments with bases at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo and elsewhere making the American presence deeply formidable. The violence in the region makes the US more guilty of infringement of the international law than any antagonist who is set up as the guilty perpetrator of violence and death. If a nation like Yugoslavia prospers with its industry and boasts of a strong military, it becomes a loud threat to the US policy of expansion and must be dealt with appropriate force ensuring its fragmentation. Is it not clear that the cold war this time is being solely initiated by the US as a strategy in keeping with its policy of expansionism and unilateral dominance of the world? In such a world full of ruthless economics, fanaticism, aggressive nationalism and, most of all, terrorism and state violence, the survival of peace depends on how we face the seen and unseen threats of our times. Vaclav Havel warns: “I feel strongly that the reckless, unbridled course of civilization today, in which almost all of us are, to some extent, involved is one of the contributing causes of violence and oppression. It is, therefore, our responsibility to improve the world, first of all in the field of the human spirit, of human conscience, of human responsibility… and thus provide some inspiration for the people of this world.” President Obama needs to pay heed to such wisdom and responsibility, ensuring the second Cold War does not once again become the prime factor for a
new arms race.
|
|
How to handle recession ONE of the remaining real differences between Labour and the Conservatives is over how governments should behave in a recession. At first glance, Tory leader David Cameron’s proposal sounds like common sense. When times are bad, you – as an individual, or a family – figure out how to cut your spending and pay down your debts. No more fancy nights out. Holiday at home. Put the stuff you don’t want on eBay. Cameron says the government should do the same: it should slash its debts, even if that means dramatically slashing spending. This was the view of economics that prevailed until the Great Depression – and it has only just made a comeback. Gordon Brown has a different view. It has underpinned his economic decisions since the Great Crash of 2008 – but unfortunately, he is such an atrocious communicator that I will have to quote somebody else to explain it. Barack Obama says: “Economists on both the left and right agree that the last thing a government should do in the middle of a recession is to cut back on spending. You see, when this recession began, many families sat around their kitchen table and tried to figure out where they could cut back. That is a completely responsible and understandable reaction. But if every family in America cuts back, then no one is spending any money, which means there are more layoffs, and the economy gets even worse. That’s why the government has to step in and temporarily boost spending in order to stimulate demand.” You keep stimulating until we are back on our feet – and then you pay back the debt in the good times. This is, when you first hear it, counter-intuitive. It means governments have to decide to spend more when we as individuals are deciding to spend less. It can seem hard for those of us who are not economists to figure out which of these views is right. Sure, we can listen to people like the Nobel Prize winner for Economics Paul Krugman, who told me he was “shocked” by Cameron’s policies and they would worsen the recession “for sure”. We can see that the Great Depression got much worse when governments took the Cameron route, and was ended by a giant programme of debt-funded government spending. But the best guide is to look at countries that are trying the Cameron approach and countries that are trying the opposite tactics now, and check the results. Throughout the nineties and the noughties, Ireland was held up as a poster child by the right. People like John Redwood and (yes) David Cameron said its model of low taxes and almost-total deregulation showed the way forward for Britain. In fact it produced the most corrupt and over-extended banking sector outside Iceland. Just one bank – Anglo Irish – is now on course to receive a €30bn extended bailout, equivalent to every penny of tax collected in the country in 2009. But the Irish government has continued to cleave to Tory solutions. After the crash, its government rejected the case for a stimulus package, and insisted its “number one priority” was to “cut the deficit and get the public finances back in order”. It sawed deep into spending on teachers, pupils, the disabled, and childcare. Out of total annual spending of €60bn, they are en route to ditching €15bn. The government is paying off its debt as its first, second and third priority, just as Cameron demands. So what happened? The economy has collapsed. As the economist Rob Brown writes in the latest issue of the New Statesman, the country is now embarked on “an astonishing 15 per cent shrinkage in the Irish economy overall – the sharpest contraction experienced by any advanced industrial nation in peacetime”. Unemployment has soared to 12.5 per cent: it would be even higher if so many young people hadn’t left the country. Only 14 per cent of Irish citizens are happy with the government’s performance. By contrast, the countries that have most strongly defied Cameronomics are pulling out of the recession first and fastest. China has ramped up state spending to 88 percent of GDP growth, paid for by increased government debt. This is Brown to the power of a hundred. If Cameron was right, this would be economic suicide, and they would be plummeting down. In fact, the recession there is now over. That’s why even right-wing leaders that initially shared Cameron’s instincts, like Angela Merkel, are reversing
course.
— By arrangement with The Independent
|
|
Chatterati AMAR Singh is at it once again. He has enough experience of throwing tantrums. Amar gets upset, sulks, makes up and then all is well. Amar Singh is a tough player and is an old hand in politics today. One can either like Amar Singh or dislike him intensely but you just cannot ignore him. His hold on Bollywood, information on people useful or useless does come handy from time to time. He has been a master in business propositions for the Samajwadi Party. As we all know politics is more or less run by business houses in this country now. So Amar is indispensable in more ways than one. He is a good bargainer for his master and he gets enough media attention for everything he does. The younger generation of the Yadavs does not understand the usefulness of an Amar Singh on their side. Mulayam Singh Yadav is desperate to patch up with Amar Singh. Not that Amar has many choices; any other political party will have to think many times before having Amar Singh. He is, after all, unique. Many have questioned Amitabh Bachchan’s presence in Gujarat with Narender Modi. Was it a signal from Amar Singh here? The timing was just a day before his resignation. The Congress is keeping a safe distance and the Samajwadi Party members are now a bit tired of Amar’s mood swings. But he is certainly indispensable for Mulayam. And that should all become clear now in a matter of weeks. BJP’s tent problem The silence in the BJP is deafening. Ever since the new president Gadkari took over, everyone is waiting to see what he does next. His friends are standing by his side to protect him, while his foes are waiting to pounce on him. The BJP delegates, around 5,000 or so, will stay in tents during the party national council/executive meet in Indore. Gadkari has announced that Deendayal Upadhyay and his philosophy of reaching out to the last man in the queue is the roadmap for every party leader. At the BJP meets in the past the delegates had stayed in tents, including the inaugural BJP national executive meet in Mumbai in 1980, the 1995 meet in Mumbai (when Advani announced Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s name as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate) and yet another meet in Mumbai in 2005. The “India Shining” campaign was perceived to have a distinct pro-rich bias, and Advani once stated that it should have, instead, been called “India Rising”. Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi has often said in his election speeches that the Opposition’s “India Shining” slogan reflected a pro-rich bias in contrast to the Congress’s agenda for “aam aadmi”. Staying in tents, as opposed to star hotels, is meant to send out a subtle message too. This new arrangement has many cribbing too. The large number of tents for the party meet will cost a huge amount. Some are concerned about the presence of mosquitoes, while most are worried about toilets and hygiene in these tents. CBI’s missing files The CBI has weathered many a storm – from Bofors to Ruchika – even though the rate of convictions in cases investigated by it is dismal. About the Aarushi murder case the less said the better. It is said that the CBI is an agency of the party in power. Important files go missing. Amazing! The latest disappearance is of files linked to ex-RAW chief A.K.Verma, needed for interrogation about funds meant for LTTE operations. The missing files are the official alibi nowadays, the most recent instance being the Headley visa papers. Another recent admission is the case of documents pertaining to the Rs 515.5 crore disinvestment of
Balco. Well, good luck if this is how records go missing from such an agency. Even though the common man still wants desperately to trust the
CBI.
|
|
|
|
| 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 | |
