The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Terrorist tag
Lessons to learn from Haneef’s case

Indian doctor Mohammad Haneef, who was arrested in Australia in 2007 on the suspicion of having links with a terrorist group and released after 12 days of detention, has won the battle for “substantial” compensation for the trauma and loss of reputation he suffered. After an exhaustive probe it has been proved that he was wrongly taken into custody. The Brisbane authorities in Australia have ultimately accepted their lapses. The compensation given by the Australian government may be around $1 million, a hefty amount by any standard. He has all the opportunities to go back to Australia and start life afresh there, though the present Australian government has expressed its inability to apologise to the 31-year-old Indian for the suffering he has undergone without any fault of his.

His dogged determination to fight his case by all the legal means available to him has borne fruit. He was sure that the baseless allegation against him that he had links with the group involved in the terrorist incidents in London and Glasgow in June 2007 would not stand legal scrutiny. It was his good fortune that he had friends and legal experts in Australia who helped him till the last without showing any signs of disinterest at any stage. But for their being with him through thick and thin during these three tension-ridden years, Haneef would not have been able to hold his head high today.

However, he will always carry the tag of having been arrested in connection with terrorism-related incidents. This is a social disability that cannot be overcome easily at a time when terrorism remains the most serious threat to peace in the world. But there is a problem. Two professionally qualified young men — one in Bangalore and the other in Jaipur — underwent this kind of experience some time ago. They were found to be innocent after their detention, yet they lost their jobs. Even if they might have got employment later on, those who knew them would always remember that they were at one time suspected terrorists. The fight against terrorism is a very delicate matter and must be carried on with utmost care so that no innocent person becomes a social outcaste.

Hurdles to growth
Poor sanitation holds back India

A recent news report has quantified the economic losses to India due to inadequate sanitation. Conducted by the Water and Sanitation Program run by the World Bank, the study says poor sanitation cost India $54 billion or 6.4 per cent of the GDP in 2006. There are losses in terms of education, productivity, time and tourism. Poverty itself is a disease, which cripples access to and success in school/college. Ill-health comes in the way of working harder and longer, and reduces productivity and income. Poor sanitation, fear of disease and lack of hygiene in India keep off high-end tourists.

If a person is down with diarrhoea, s/he cannot focus on study or work, and treatment costs time and money. The poor are mostly the victims of diarrohea, malaria and TB, the mass killers which are actually preventable. According to the study, 3.5 lakh children, aged below five, die of diarrhoea alone in India every year. All this because they have no access to clean drinking water. Their parents cannot buy treatment, and sometimes do not make an effort due to lack of awareness and time.

While the rural areas lack basic amenities for want of funds, official accountability and political will, the urban areas fail to cope with an increasing pressure on limited civic amenities due to a rising population and migration from villages. Rural women and girls find it hard to get out of poverty due to social restrictions, reproductive role, domestic responsibilities, malnutrition and lack of education and skills. This brings to focus the role various health officials and agencies as well as NGOs can play in the removal of filth, establishment of toilets, control of disease and spread of education and awareness. Progress is not just about producing more; it is also about making available accessible facilities required for a healthy, happy and dignified life.

Thought for the Day

Liberty is the only thing you can't have unless you give it to others. — William Allen White

ARTICLE

Indian diplomacy today
WikiLeaks raises uncomfortable questions
by G. Parthasarathy

THE cables exchanged between Washington and Islamabad, as released WikiLeaks, have been immeasurably useful for Indians to understand the limitations in the support the Obama Administration can provide India as it confronts the challenges posed by terrorism unleashed by the Pakistan Army. They also raise doubts about whether our government has indeed fulfilled its primary responsibility of ensuring that our armed forces are equipped, prepared and trained to respond swiftly, appropriately and effectively to provocations like the 26/11 strike in Mumbai. They will, hopefully, introduce a measure of long overdue realism in those who advocate that mere sweet words can convince the hard-boiled Generals in Rawalpindi to shed their compulsive hostility towards India. But, as cables containing details of meetings with members of the Indian establishment become public, serious doubts and misgivings arise about whether New Delhi has any consistent policy in dealing with its western neighbour. They also raise doubts about the viability and consistency of internal decision making in the portals of power in South Block.

When the then US National Security Adviser, Gen James Jones, called on Defence Minister A.K. Antony on June 28, 2009, and raised the issue of dialogue with Pakistan, Mr Antony responded: “Unless there is some tangible follow-up action by Pakistan against the perpetrators of the 26/11 attack, discussions with Pakistan will be difficult.” General Jones promised to take this up with the Pakistanis while adding that there was “need to move forward on a broader strategy of building confidence and trust”. Barely a fortnight later, on July 16, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh strangely agreed that “action against terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed”. What prompted this serious and unexplainable U-turn in policy within a fortnight? No one argues that we should shun all dialogue with Pakistan. But, at the same time, agreeing to unconditionally resume the “composite dialogue process” without Pakistan fulfilling its assurances of ending terrorism against India emanating from territory under its control certainly undermines our position on the centrality of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism

The Sharm-el-Sheikh Declaration strangely noted that “Prime Minister Gilani mentioned that Pakistan has some information about threats in Balochistan and other areas”. Yet, the Wikileaks documents reveal that when the issue of Balochi leaders like Brahmdagh Bugti, leading the uprising in Balochistan and operating out of Afghanistan, was taken up by the Americans, President Karzai retorted: “Fomenting uprising does not make one a terrorist. The real terrorists are Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar. Afghanistan needs a sign that Pakistan will stop supporting these terrorists.”

Responding to American queries about why Bugti was not being extradited to Pakistan, Mr Karzai asserted: ”The Bugtis are not terrorists and represented nobility in Afghanistan, so it would be hard to hand them over to Pakistan.” President Karzai categorically rejected Pakistani allegations of Indian involvement in Balochistan adding: “Pakistan will continue to think India is involved. There is lot of misinformation out there.” One wonders that if Mr Karzai could be so forthright on Balochistan why New Delhi has been so defensive in responding to Pakistani accusations.

While the flip-flops on dialogue with Pakistan have naturally drawn flak, India can look back with satisfaction on the firmness it has shown in dealing with developments in Afghanistan. Just on the eve of its assuming office, the Obama Administration was excessively influenced by the arguments of Pakistani academics like Ahmed Rashid that it should appoint a special envoy to resolve differences between India and Pakistan on Jammu and Kashmir. New Delhi reacted decisively by debunking such talk and thereafter by denying visits to India by Richard Holbrooke during the course of his frequent visits to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Holbrooke was forced to publicly clarify that his charter of responsibilities did not include India and his visits to New Delhi were primarily for exchanging views on Af-Pak developments.

In his meeting with General Jones last year, Mr Antony made it clear that India wanted that the international community’s operations in Afghanistan should succeed adding: “India cannot for a moment imagine a Taliban takeover of its extended neighbourhood.” With NATO now clarifying that it intends to continue combat operations in Afghanistan till the end of 2014, there is a wider consensus in the United States about the inadvisability of leaving a power vacuum in Afghanistan, which would lead to a Taliban-takeover.

A recent report of the Centre for New American Security prepared by the former ISAF Commander in Afghanistan, General David Bruno, makes substantive recommendations for a modified American strategy in Afghanistan. The report, which realistically recognises that “the war in Afghanistan is unlikely to have a well-defined end with clear winners and losers”, calls for a restructuring of governance in Afghanistan with more powers devolved to provinces and districts. Moreover, it advocates a “responsible transition “, which allows the US to” focus its resources on countering transnational terrorist groups based in the Pakistan-Afghanistan region”. Writing in the “Foreign Affairs” quarterly, Mr Robert Blackwill advocates that the US should stop talking of an “exit strategy” and adopt a long-term strategy of counter-terrorism in Pashtun-dominated Southern Afghanistan, accepting that the Taliban will inevitably control most of Southern and Eastern Afghanistan, while taking on “nation building” with support from Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras and” supportive Pashtuns” in northern and western Afghanistan. He adds that in such a scenario the US should continue to provide arms and intelligence to those Pashtun tribal leaders who are ready to challenge Taliban hegemony.

Acknowledging that his strategy could result in a de facto partition of Afghanistan, Mr Blackwill advocates the reduction of troop levels in Afghanistan to between 35,000 and 50,000 troops. He argues that “such a strategy would reduce Islamabad’s capacity to use the US ground role in Southern Afghanistan to extract tolerance from Washington regarding terrorism emanating from Pakistan”. What is interesting is that both these recent studies by prominent American analysts with first-hand knowledge of Af-Pak developments reject any possibility of rapid American withdrawal from Afghanistan and as such withdrawal would “trigger a global outpouring of support for jihadi ideology and increased terrorism against liberal societies more broadly”.

Moreover, both reports acknowledge that Afghanistan can be ruled effectively only by traditional decentralised power structures and that effective action is required against “transnational terrorist groups”. India will have to focus its diplomatic efforts on securing international support for strategies that enable Afghans to run their country overcoming the pernicious ambitions of neighbouring Pakistan. This can happen only when Pakistan realises that it will have to pay a heavy price for its present policies of support for transnational terrorist groups.

MIDDLE

Guru of criminal jurisprudence
by Rajinder S. Cheema

JUSTICE Kulwant Singh Tiwana, who died earlier this month, was a tall person and a towering judge. Although he retired in the 1980s, he is still fondly remembered as a judge of extraordinary insight. Many revere him as the guru of criminal jurisprudence.

As generations of lawyers pass by the court room where he presided over a Division Bench dealing with criminal appeals, someone points out how perfect the decorum was during his period. He did not have to raise his voice to ensure the perfect atmosphere that inspired best performances from both sides of the bar. He would cut short a rude reaction or a loud overstatement by a short witty remark or a characteristically appropriate anecdote that fitted squarely into the situation.

With all his charm and sophistication he was the ideal representative of the rustic wisdom. That made him an enchanting narrator and conversationalist in Punjabi.

The manner in which he could unearth the truth by his appreciation of probabilities left us awestruck. It perhaps was a rare blending of a high level of intelligence; robust commonsense that comes naturally to a peasant; first-hand knowledge of the lives that Punjabis live; and the objectivity of a judge that vaguely explains his magic.

His command of medical jurisprudence and ballistics gave him an edge over the best of judges and lawyers. His knowledge of human anatomy and medical intricacies made lawyers, particularly the younger ones, work very hard. The level of discourse naturally would go high.

One of his judgments on what the report of a ballistic expert must contain, would remain a landmark.

Humour was his great strength as a judge and a human being. In one of the cases where the brother of a senior police officer in Haryana had been murdered, the father, a practising doctor, appeared as a witness. He deposed about the visit of the accused to his clinic on the evening of the occurrence. Before I could take up my criticism of the doctor’s testimony Justice Tiwana’s first reaction was: “A doctor, like a lawyer, has an uncommon memory. He remembers the patients and their maladies well. And here we have an intelligent and a respectable witness”.

Faced with an early unfavorable reaction, I retorted: “My Lords, there are no sacred cows here. A witness is a witness and must be critically evaluated.” Justice Tiwana answered: “there are no sacrificial goats also, Mr. Cheema.”

Fortunately, I had the better of the second exchange between us. When the evidence was being read in court, a witness was described as Sham Lal, Ahlmad (Criminal) PW-6. Justice Pritpal Singh, another judge of remarkable ability in criminal matters, comprised the Bench with Justice Tiwana. He queried in a low tone: “Is this person still in service – this criminal?

I was quick with my response saying that the word ‘criminal’ has been secularized; e.g. ‘we are criminal lawyers……..’ Anticipating the mischief, Justice Tiwana cut me short and said: “Don’t you dare say a ‘Criminal Bench’. We are Division Bench V (Criminal).” It was my turn to say: “My Lords, concealed criminality is the worst”

OPED-governance

IAS: Bring the corrupt to justice
With many top civil servants at the Centre charged with financial wrongdoings, the Indian Administrative Service is passing through a disturbing phase. Prasar Bharti CEO B.S. Lalli and former UP Chief Secretary Neera Yadav are only two examples of the rot that has set in. There are many more across the country. Two former Chief Secretaries of Delhi and Punjab examine the crisis in the IAS.
Shailaja Chandra

THE day Neera Yadav, the one-time Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, was sentenced to undergo imprisonment, it was damning for the Indian Administrative Service (IAS). Not because corruption in the senior echelons of the civil service was either a new phenomenon or rare. But because, until then, there were handy excuses to deny and dismiss accusations — investigations under way, hindrances in obtaining prosecution sanction, political nexus at play; endless court processes — the very reasons that had prevented cases of malfeasance ever reaching finality, leave alone jail.

Denial of involvement in corruption continues even today when no one with even a few years into the IAS is unaware of those among his peers and seniors that are corrupt, the quid pro quos that have secured influential jobs and even the very middlemen and women that brokered the deals. Niira Radias and their ilk have operated at different levels right from the seventies manipulating their way through the chain of personal secretaries, family factotums, and relatives of people in power — only there were no tapes depicting how the deals were struck.

But most officers do not talk about these realities openly because they cannot predict which way the wind might blow as the years pass by. As happened with Neera Yadav in UP. Even after the UP cadre IAS officers ranked Neera Yadav among the top three “most corrupt IAS officers of UP”, it did not prevent her appointment as the Chief Secretary. And that was shocking because the Chief Secretary heads the entire public service of the state, acts as the Chief Minister’s chief policy adviser carrying overall responsibility for conduct of all government business. Most former British colonies still have Chief Secretaries in the states and provinces, considered next in line after the Governor or the Chief Minister and holding vastly superior powers in bureaucracy.

No Cabinet meeting can be held without the Chief Secretary who alone can minute the proceedings. The whole civil service of the state reports directly or indirectly to him. All senior postings, including statutory and constitutional appointments, are made with his recommendation and he has the final say. He is the main negotiator on critical matters of inter-state interest while acting as a dependable bridge between the state and the Centre. For performing these functions, the Chief Secretary has to possess acumen and integrity to inspire hundreds of officers that look up to him for guidance, strength and succour, when confronted with political perils.

But the Chief Secretary, unless imbued with zeal to preserve the public interest, can instead use his extraordinary authority to manipulate the system, offer patronage to vested interests, shield corrupt officers and politicise the bureaucracy. In short, he can proactively contribute to rotten governance. Over the years, the honour and dignity of being appointed Chief Secretary has been displaced. New attributes are increasingly sought and can be found quite easily — the ability to fall in line and help the Chief Minister, the political class and business interests to achieve their greedy goals — and to do it by hook or by crook.

Had the Noida Entrepreneurs’ Association not filed a writ petition alleging bungling in land allotment during Neera Yadav’s tenure as Chairman of the Noida Authority, she would have continued as the Chief Secretary and on retirement won the election and become a Minister.

For young officers desperately looking for the path to choose, it would have reinforced the belief that it pays to go the NeeraYadav way. Only in this case the Supreme Court directed that an investigation take place which ultimately ended in a jail sentence for her.

Corruption is rampant in many state governments where a plethora of projects and programmes are implemented through arbitrary exercise of power — all in the name of the poor. Most of India’s billion-strong population lives in the states and not in the metros. The disproportionate focus on the lives and times of New Delhi obliterate what is happening by way of abysmal governance in the real India. If there is still hope that India will one day miraculously reform itself, it will not come through panel discussions on national television. It will come by ousting corrupt officials in the state governments and replacing them with honest ones. But for that the responsibility for the appointment of top players must rest in safe hands — starting with the Chief Secretary of the state. The least that has to be done is to deny senior appointments to those involved in a Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) case while simultaneously widen the ambit of corruption as recommended by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission.

The Second ARC had recommended inclusion of four kinds of misconduct to be termed as corruption: Subversion of the Constitution and democratic institutions (for example, shackling the freedom of speech and conniving with police excesses; unduly favouring or harming someone (the allotment of land, housing and scarce commodities on the principle of pick and choose as in Adarsh and Noida scams; obstruction of justice (delaying prosecution, issuance of charge-sheets and initiation of disciplinary action as in Neera Yadav’s case; and squandering public money by bodies like the Commonwealth Games Organising Committee.

A new section should be introduced under the PCA to include “collusive bribery” — “if the outcome or intended outcome of a transaction leads to a loss to the state, the public or public interest”, it would be corruption involving both the public servant and the beneficiary (for example, persistent maladministration of the public distribution system).

These recommendations, far from being woolly headed, are essential and practical. But it is unlikely that they will ever get implemented. If corruption is to be checked, the only way is to equate misgovernance with criminality. There is need for time-bound implementation of the ARC’s recommendations. We need a civil society leadership that can force the government to change the definition of corruption; backed by a PIL that can leverage judicial direction to make it happen.

The writer is a former Chief Secretary, Government of Delhi

It’s too deep a malaise
Rajan Kashyap

From ancient times, Indian scriptures have denounced ‘lobh’ (greed) as a noxious frailty of human character. In the Christian faith, avarice or covetousness is similarly considered one of the seven deadly sins. India’s democratic tradition maintains a strict ethical position.

Under the Indian Constitution, all three organs of the state — the executive, the legislature and the judiciary — are variously empowered to uphold integrity in public life. We have in place a fearless political opposition, a fiercely active media and independent Election and Vigilance Commissions.

Recent events suggest that the country has failed to adhere to the lofty ideals of public honesty. Corruption seems widespread. Allegations of venality by rapacious Ministers, involving thousands of crores of rupees, grab newspaper headlines. A former Chief Secretary of India’s largest state — Uttar Pradesh — is convicted for financial bungling; numerous senior police officers are punished. The Supreme Court expresses open disgust at a “rotten” High Court, where nepotism prevails.

Some of the country’s highest ranked military officers are shown to have exploited their position for personal benefit. National and state political leaders, both from the ruling party and the opposition, are involved in scams and shady deals. For the first time in history, Parliament is paralysed in a stand-off between the government and the Opposition, on the issue of corruption in high places.

The Supreme Court of India questions the personal honesty of the Chief Vigilance Commissioner, the highest authority for ensuring probity in public bodies. The media, democracy’s unofficial watchdog, find their representatives enmeshed in sleaze, suggesting unholy alliances with business houses and officials. Many readers turn to the sports page in newspapers in expectation of some relief from the gloomy stories of greed and degradation marking the other pages. Such sports lovers are disappointed, for now the sports page too highlights the scandals of money laundering by sports administrators, rather than inspiring tales of sporting excellence.

Consider the British Broadcasting Corporation’s latest finding. According to a BBC poll, most respondents in India listed corruption in public life as the issue of greatest concern to them, superseding even the threat of terror. Transparency International grades India as one of the most corrupt nations in the world.

These are the melancholic symptoms of poor governance. What are the causes of this malady afflicting the Indian state today? Many public institutions are unwilling, or unable to enforce accountability of persons wielding authority. The rule of law is diminished. The famous Lebanese poet Khalil Gibran could well have been describing the situation in India when he wrote: You delight in laying down laws; Yet you delight more in breaking them.

Administrative timidity, stemming from political compulsions, protects law breakers. Discretionary authority tends to be exercised arbitrarily, frequently to benefit individuals at public cost. And persons with criminal record continue to secure access to powerful posts. The Election Commission’s efforts to debar such tainted candidates from contesting elections are nullified. Political parties, no matter what their differences are, unanimously court such vote catchers of dubious integrity.

Despite the unethical onslaught there is reason for optimism about the future. As per Newton’s famous law, every action must have an equal and opposite reaction. In response to every vehement attack on our institutions, the Indian state is seen to respond positively, if somewhat sluggishly. Following rarely voiced criticism of the judiciary, a Bill to ensure greater accountability of judges is before Parliament. Ministers and officials, however mighty, are on trial for errors of omission and commission. Blemished civil and military officers currently face imminent retribution. Revelations about corporate fraud have left big business houses scurrying for cover.

The Right to Information Act, the proactive position of the Lokayuktas and the Central Vigilance Commission and strident public debates on corrupt practices, all these are visibly moving the country towards greater transparency and accountability. These inbuilt mechanisms are effectively counterbalancing disruptive forces. Our democracy displays remarkable self-cleansing properties.

Our instruments of state are today exposed continually to the “slings and arrows” of outraged public opinion. The information revolution has been lauded for its success in dissemination of information, accelerating economic development, and scientific decision-making. It has also been vilified for invading privacy, and exposing the seamy side of powerful bodies. Such unprecedented public exposure compels the executive, the judiciary and the legislature to reform, and to perform effectively.

The organs of state have earned public opprobrium. This alone will compel them to work to potential to restore the rule of law. It is well said that the lowest ebb is the turn of the tide. This writer is sanguine enough to predict that the country will be shamed into delivering good governance. Ideally, corruption should be a permanent election issue, to debate and to tackle.

The writer is a former Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab