The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Ill-equipped schools
Haryana has much to do on education

Time and again the Haryana Government has proclaimed that education is its priority. But the recent series by The Tribune has exposed the dismal ground reality. It is obvious that education in most government schools in Haryana’s rural areas exists only in name. Many glaring deficiencies afflict its government schools. From paucity of teachers to the absence of infrastructure ranging from simple requirements like desks and benches to scientific laboratories, the quality of education being imparted is clearly below par. Undeniably, education in government schools of Haryana needs to be overhauled and monitored with earnestness.

It is not as if the state government is not paying attention to promote education. Not too long ago it took pride in the increased enrolment ratio of girls under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan programme. More recently, Education Minister Geeta Bhukkal claimed: “We will go all out to convince all children in the age group of 6–14 years to attend school.” However, the government must understand that merely sending children to school is not enough. Efforts have to be made to provide quality education that enables and equips students of all sections of society to deal with the exigencies of practical life. The fact that in some schools even Class IX English topper cannot read a sentence is an indictment of both the teachers and the education system of the state.

There is an urgent need to re-look at the policy of promotion of students without proper evaluation. Failure in class will be far less detrimental than inability to cope with demands of jobs and life. The government that has promised to do the needful, including putting up an inspection mechanism in place, needs to get its act together. It should stop interfering in the recruitment of teachers and their transfers as well as refrain from assigning them non-teaching tasks. At the same time the teaching community too must take their role as educators with greater responsibility. Until society at large develops a rural-centric attitude, the lopsided development of the nation will continue to pose obstacles in its real progress and growth.

Nepal on the boil again
Maoists are to blame for fuelling unrest

The Maoists know only one way to get their viewpoint across: resort to strikes leading to violence. Therefore, it is not surprising that they have gone ahead with their threat of May Day demonstrations and an indefinite nation-wide strike despite considerable efforts by the Madhav Kumar Nepal government to resolve all the contentious issues through dialogue. By taking to a confrontationist course the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has done no service to Nepal as the country is passing through a very crucial phase in its post-monarchy era. The process of drafting a democratic constitution for Nepal within the stipulated timeframe (till May 28) may get derailed. In an emotionally charged atmosphere, devising a formula to induct the armed Maoist cadres into the Nepal Army may also not be possible.

On Wednesday, the three major political parties of Nepal --- the ruling Nepali Congress and the CPN (UML), and the opposition UCPN (Maoist) – appeared to have reached an understanding to forge a consensus on how to resolve the issues coming in the way of establishing peace in Nepal. This had brightened up the hope for the indefinite strike to be called off by the Maoists. But the situation took a turn for the worse on Friday with the Maoists insisting on the Madhav Kumar Nepal government resigning to allow a “national unity government” to be formed. The government was reportedly ready to accept the demand, but this could not happen as, perhaps, the Maoists wanted too many concessions without withdrawing their strike call first. The result was the toughening of his stand by Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal.

The Nepal government is rightly determined not to give in to the Maoists’ blackmailing tactics and handle the situation by using the Nepal Police and the Armed Police Force, and deploying the Nepal Army in highly sensitive areas. Maoist ideologue Baburam Bhattarai has, however, described the deployment of the army as being in violation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement reached between the two sides. The Maoists must not forget that any step that is taken to save the democratic process in Nepal will have the support of the world community. They are on the losing side.

Thought for the Day

Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently. — Rose Luxemburg

ARTICLE

The other SAARC summit
Indo-Pak hostility must go for region to grow
by Kuldip Nayar

It may well have been another futile exercise, another attempt to scale the mountain of difficulties. Yet the people’s SAARC held its meeting in Delhi -its 15th - to re-emphasise the official SAARC summit at Thimpu that the countries in South Asia would continue to lag behind in development until they realised that they had no better alternative to cooperation.

Representatives of human rights organisations, trade unions, women’s groups and others from all the eight countries in the SAARC region — Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Pakistan, Nepal, the Maldives and Sri Lanka — vied with one another to demand a union of South Asian countries, like the European Union, while retaining their individual identity and sovereignty. Some even saw the prospects of one market, one visa and one currency. In the statement they adopted after the two-day conference, the representatives (60 from Pakistan alone) “reaffirmed the South Asian people’s commitment to creating a South Asia free from all discrimination, exclusion and domination.”

Indeed, these are lofty ideals. But they are worth pursuing. The participants were not only passionate about them but also committed to rise above nationalism and parochialism to make the dream of South Asia Union come true. Their speeches had no rancour, no bitterness and no allegation. They seemed to read one another’s mind and talked of steps about how to live together as friendly neighbours.

All the eight countries are different in their own way. Yet they are similar in one way: the years of foreign rule has hammered their outlook in a civilisational mould which reflects commonality. But, unfortunately, they seek solution to their basic problems not from within the region but from outside.

This dependence is the fallout of their slavery. The British, who ruled practically the entire region, were ruthless masters. They used people in the region as brick and mortar to build their empire. Any big or odd stone that did not fit in was crushed or thrown aside. Not many rose to challenge the system and the very few who did were nipped in the bud. Others were eliminated.

Still this region, people of different traditions, defeated the Great Britain and rolled out the mighty empire. In their journey towards independence, they fell and rose but reached their destination. It is a saga of suffering and sacrifice which is recalled even today.

South Asia has learned the lesson that every enslaved country does suffer from humiliation. But what it has not is that people have to tie hands with one another to overcome the problems. Together they can fight to determine the path they should take, the tactics they should adopt and the ally they should seek. All this demands an understanding that they are together, no chinks in the armour. This cannot be assumed. A method has to be devised to ascertain opinion, yes or no.

What do people think? What do the participants in the struggle for betterment feel? This effort to determine sows the seed of accountability. If some are to be made answerable, they should have the powers to act. Who should such people be? How would they be spotted out? In the 17th century, the English established themselves as the world’s supreme against rival claimants, especially the crown. Since then the idea of popular sovereignty has become an integral part of civilized governments. Some nations like France learned from England’s example.

We in South Asia are a watchful people. We were determined to throw out foreign rule. We also wanted to devise a system to rule ourselves. Our experience was all that the British taught us-the different acts under which the carefully selected people would come to the assemblies and parliaments to rule. A very few came directly, elected by the people. That was our democratic system. Our struggle in different parts of the region was to have more and more elected representatives.

We shed one another’s blood, although we were independent. The subcontinent of India was partitioned into India and Pakistan on the basis of religion. Sri Lanka was only given freedom and Bhutan as well, when it was not the British protectorate. When the constitution in the newly independent countries was framed, the people’s say was naturally the most. The biggest achievement through the constitution was to keep the rights of people supreme and to ensure that the nations did not substitute white masters with brown sahibs.

It was not the question of government alone. It was also the question of constitutional guarantee whereby sovereignty remained with the people: How to ensure that the right of the voters in elections was theirs. And does democracy mean only going to the polling booths and registering votes? The answer to such questions may be able to tell whether democracy would survive in South Asia.

The people’s wishes-and prayers-would have fructified to a large extent by this time if the hostility between India and Pakistan had been overcome. The fact is that even what the two countries agree upon at the summit remain on paper because the decisions are not acceptable to the establishment, the ultimate arbiter, in their respective country.

Both India and Pakistan have not been able to overcome their differences going back to the days before Partition. In a way, it is the same old bias between Hindus and Muslims. Parochialism spoils the thinking of secular India when it comes to Pakistan. On the other hand, Pakistan has never adopted secularism even after Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s declaration that the state would have nothing to do with religion.

Between August 1947 and 2010, the two countries have fought the Kashmir war and two general wars in 1965 and 1971, apart from covert wars like the Rann of Kutch, Gibraltor, the Siachin, Grand Slam and Kargil. Both are also nuclear powers. Still they love to hate each other. Kashmir and water are symptoms, not the disease. The disease is the bias, suspicion and mistrust, which appear in one form or another. You can solve one issue but another will rear its ugly head because the basic Hindu-Muslim divide stays. How do the two nations get away from it? The sooner we find an answer to this question, the stronger will be SAARC.

MIDDLE

Making sense of sensex
by Trilochan Singh Trewn

I was staying in the bachelor officers’ mess in INS Angre during the post-Partition days. The place was close to the National Stock Exchange of India building in Dalal Street. We used to go for morning walks up to Churchgate.

In this area Mr Narotam Das, serving in National Stock Exchange, also resided. We used to meet during our morning walks. He showed keen interest in visiting ships, more so for benefit of his two ever-inquisitive kids. I responded by taking his family occasionally by speed boats to ships at anchorage near Gateway of India but never enquired about his job details.

One day he invited me to visit his office. I agreed and arrived at the National Exchange building complex in forenoon. His personal secretary told me that Mr Narotam Das was busy in a meeting attended by CEOs from Birlas. Tatas, Voltas, Kirloskar and other corporate houses in connection with issue of bonus and rights issue, equity shares and asked me to wait. He also told me that Narotam Bhai was Director of National Stock Exchange and I may not get any chance of meeting him.

I gave him my visiting card insisting to present my card to the boss even while he was amidst the meeting as I had to go on duty soon. The PS went in while I waited. Soon I saw Narotam Bhai coming out, greeting me and asking me to join him as an observer in the meeting.

I had not seen Jehangir Tata, GD Birla and other top business tycoons of India seated there, before. As a novice I was just overwhelmed to find myself in such an august gathering, uninvited.

Meeting over, I was introduced to the dignitaries as his friend from the Navy. Mr Sethna from Tata Chemicals mentioned that there was provision for select outsiders to acquire rights shares. I thanked but declined the offer as being a very junior officer I had no money to invest in any equity shares, no matter how lucrative those could be.

After corporate heads left, the director took me to trading hall where equity shares were traded by voice or gestures by brokers. One could not make out anything but I enjoyed the din and wild gesticulations of participants.

Next he took me to a very secure section where wireless reports from various international trading centres were being received indicating financial fluctuations. He explained that the valuable data ultimately assisted in determining daily sensex — a dream news item for millions of Indians. At this point my curiosity stirred and I asked him quietly how and who decides about sensex figure before it is announced to the public. He paused and said very plainly: "Finally it is the prevailing sentiment which decides daily sensex figure."

Despite the common man's conception regarding favourable monsoon and bumper crop in India sensex may fall while excellent news of good fiscal reports from corners of Japan, Germany and the US may instantly boost the index. I had never expected that I would come so close to sensex makers with my empty pockets!

OPED

Caught snooping
State fails to protect citizens’ privacy
by Ashwani Kumar

Allegations of phone tapping through sophisticated electronic devices disrupted the functioning of Parliament last week. The Indian state has the responsibility to secure the citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy. Democracy demands a proactive role of the state in preventing the invasion of the most cherished of all human rights that defines our identity and ensures our dignity.

While the government has allayed the Opposition’s apprehensions, the fact remains that the easy availability of sophisticated snooping and surveillance devices can be increasingly resorted to by desperate individuals and non-state actors to render futile our right to privacy repeatedly affirmed by the apex court as an integral component of the right to life itself as envisaged in Article 21 of the Constitution.

Thus, the questions we must ask ourselves are: Will it suffice for the government of the day to argue that it respects the citizens’ right to privacy and will not authorise its infraction except for overarching reasons of national security and unity of India, while others (non-state actors) with the requisite equipment are allowed to breach the sanctity of one’s private space?

In the face of repeated allegations of violation of the citizen’s right to privacy and dignity by entities other than the state, can we rest content with the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court for interception of tele-conversation in the PUCL vs.UOI (1997), which guidelines refer only to telephone tapping by the Government of India, through the Home Secretary and reviewed by a committee chaired by the Cabinet Secretary ? Is there a credible system of accountability of the Cabinet Secretary or the Home Secretary for a possible lack of diligence and care in authorising phone tapping? What can be the recompense for the wronged citizen who has had his privacy invaded without cause for long periods?

Creeping encroachments by the state in the privacy domain for want of adherence to the imperatives of national security and indifference to the brazen onslaughts on our right to privacy, free speech and personal dignity by non-state actors, including conspiring individuals and corporates impel an urgent review of the processes to ensure that constitutional rights are indeed treated as sacrosanct and beyond the reach of lesser men insensitive to the values of a liberal society.

It is inherent in the dynamics of law and nature of the judicial process that notions of justice and freedom change to meet the demands of social evolution. But must we allow inviolable human rights that define our dignity, including the “right to be left alone” be encroached upon beyond a clear constitutional endorsement? The reality of international terrorism and an extended reach of non-state actors to imperil national security and indeed the enhanced threats that nation states face to their unity and integrity are often cited in justification of the state’s prying into our daily existence. Even so, can we, without scarifying the first values of our Republic, condone the state’s action or inaction responsible for endangering the privacy and liberty of the masses in order to checkmate a few deviants?

The apex court having equated the right to liberty and right to privacy as integral to the right to life in Article 21 (Kharak Singh 1964) is expected, as the keeper of the constitutional conscience, to ensure that not just the state but all others are chained to the discipline of law with a heavy price to be paid by those responsible for infractions of the first principles of the Indian state. Above all, it is the eternal vigil of our informed citizenry that will secure our hard-won and well-deserved freedoms. Indeed, the right to privacy as a fundamental right implicit in the concept of ordered liberty as reiterated by the Supreme Court in Govind Vs. State of MP (1975) is to be protected not only against the state but against all others, save in the interest of national security and the unity of the nation as narrowly construed. Leo Valiani the historian, makes the point thus: “Our century demonstrates that the victory of the ideals of justice and equality is always ephemeral, but also that, if we manage to preserve liberty, we can always start all over again…. There is no need to despair, even in the most desperate situations.”

Legislators and parliamentarians are collectively required to face the challenges of the new age – “the age of extremes”— to ensure the lasting relevance of our non-negotiable values. We must accept that certain rights and laws which protect these rights are more permanent than others and owe no apology to the transient impulses of the moment.

The leadership of the UPA, which has initiated a transformational agenda of national renewal, can be legitimately expected to take further initiatives to secure the foundations of our liberal democracy by securing the dignity of citizens.

The writer is a Congress member of the Rajya Sabha. The views expressed are personal

PPSC row: Selections then and now
by J.B. Goyal

The revelation of “generous” marks given to some candidates by the Punjab Public Service Commission in interviews for the selection of medical officers will not surprise or shock anybody because such things are now repeatedly occurring in one selection or the other, not just in the PPSC but in the commissions of some other states as well.

In this context, I am reminded of my personal experiences in certain state public service commissions — first as a candidate and then as an expert, which in contrast are more refreshing.

It was in 1960 that I appeared before the PPSC office situated in Baradari Gardens, Patiala, for the post of lecturer. Mr Hardwari Lal was the presiding member of the selection committee and there was an expert from Mahindra College, Patiala. There was only one post.

I was interviewed for about half an hour on my subject. At one point of time, discussions came around the subject of the Ph.D thesis of the expert himself. At that time, I had not completed my Ph.D and was working on my thesis. I severely criticised the findings of the expert and held views quite opposite to his views.

Strangely, I was not only selected, but was also given two advance increments. I had no contact or recommendation. It was only on the basis of my academic career, my research publications and post-graduate teaching experience that I was selected.

Later, about 25 years ago, I was associated as an expert in the Jammu and Kashmir Public Service Commission for the selection of lectures. The interviews were held in Srinagar and Jammu for a number of days. Each candidate was interviewed for about 30 minutes by me on his subject. Fifty marks were allotted for the interview and the marks given by me were discussed by all members and in almost all cases my views were honoured. At the end of the day, sheets of all the members were signed by each one of us and sealed.

On the final day of the interview the results were finalised in the presence of all the members, including myself, adding the marks obtained by the candidates for academic achievements and experience etc. which were worked out according to the rules. The list of selected candidates was signed by all the members, including myself. There was fairness and complete transparency.

I had a similar experience in the HPPSC, Shimla, and the Rajasthan PSC, Ajmer. In Rajasthan the list of selected candidates was finalised on the last day in my presence and was exhibited on the premises of the commission the same day.

I had the opportunity of having an association with the UPSC also for the civil services examination for five long years as a paper-setter and the Head Examiner. I visited the UPSC office several times for coordinating the final list of marks. I must say there was no interference of any kind at any point of time.

I also had the privilege of acting as an expert in the selection of teachers in senior positions in a number of universities all over the country and also in the UGC. I can say with a sense of responsibility that in all such cases the views of the experts prevailed.

Even in the case of selection of lecturers in various non-government colleges of the state I was associated with a large number of posts on various occasions and I can say with confidence that selections were made on merit and we did not allow any outside interference. So there was never ever any complaint or controversy.

But those are things of the past. Times have changed; greed and lust for power and money have taken over ethics, morality, honesty and integrity. We are drowned neck deep in the bog of corruption, which was polluted our public life and now runs through our veins.

The writer is a former UGC Emeritus Fellow, Kurukshetra

Chatterati
A brave new step
by Devi Cherian

Last week the rich and famous of Delhi got together for a power-packed fund-raising gala evening. The initiative came from Payal Abdullah, wife of Chief Minister Omar Abdullah. It was also the first-ever “charity fund raiser ball” in the capital. Never has anybody belonging to a political family had the guts to take this step but, of course, the Abdullahs are a class apart. Payal comes from an army background.

She runs a charity called “Raahat”. She founded this NGO after the earthquake rocked Kashmir and left many families and children helpless and alone. Many of us do think of doing things for the poor but then we give it up as soon as we get busy in our own daily chores. But Payal and her two friends kept on feeding, clothing and housing the thousands of helpless orphans and widows and kept “Raahat” low key, out of everybody’s sight.

But she dreams of providing education to every child of the under-privileged in Kashmir. So this was Payal’s brilliant idea now to lure the rich and famous by hosting what they enjoy the best, that is a sit-down dinner and in the process also invade their deep pockets to fund her project. Her mother-in-law, Molly, especially flew in from London to encourage her daughter-in-law’s good work and her husband, Omar Abdullah, was the perfect host to most of the invitees who had wilfully paid for their dinner.

There were Sheila Dikshit, Robert Vadra and Sunil Mittal. From Bollywood there were Pooja Bedi, Sanjay Dutt and the master of ceremonies for the evening was Rahul Bose. Sanjay and Pooja had been in The Lawrence School in Sanawar with Omar. The energetic Farooq Abdullah danced through the evening while Omar and his two sons were the cynosure of all eyes as they presented Payal a bouquet as their appreciation for her bold initiative.

Hopefully, this step of Payal will bring a new hope for the deprived lot in Kashmir. A brave step in an orthodox political system but a right one, no doubt.

Spying scandal

Suddenly it is the season of spies. The shock of a woman IFS officer, Madhuri Gupta, being caught in Islamabad passing information to Pakistani handlers has rocked the local establishment. For once though it looks like the counter-intelligence folks were happily ahead in the race. In such sensitive matters, of course, very little really gets revealed, except for the official leaks. Locally it is natural that Delhi circles are speculating based on what those in their business comment informally. Once again, there is a similarity with the spy scandal. How deep and how far it goes is an uncharted territory. But given that the NTRO like the RAW is shadowy and silent, the tongues wag and truth stays conveniently obscured. Internal security systems in our embassies are still rather primitive. Delhi can get rather tight-tipped as far as the official establishment is concerned. But on another kind of spying, the tongues are wagging every minute. The phone tapping of local politicians has opened up many cans of worms. Nobody is quite sure who has been tapped and what has been recorded.

Sharad Pawar was the earlier recipient of tapped and taped conversations on the IPL matter. It helped to reduce pressure on the government in Parliament. Other political leaders like Arun Jaitley were silenced with the fact that the NTRO was set up as a rogue outfit by the NDA and accountable only to the National Security Adviser. While the Pawar CD is whispered about, many other politicians went strangely quiet on sensitive issues and Pranab Mukherjee pulled his budget through with relative comfort, thanks to the intelligence agencies and pervert devices.