|
|
|
|
|
Tota gets
away lightly |
|
|
Socialist
as French President Regional
is national
Hostages
to fortune
For the
love of dog!
Discrimination
begins before birth Three
strategies to win the battle
|
|
Socialist as French President
The
French voters have favoured a Socialist as their President after a long gap as the first Socialist head of government, Francois Mitterand, left office in 1995. But Sunday’s poll result was not suprising as most opinion polls had predicted Mr Hollande’s victory with around 53 per cent votes. He had been leading in the opinion polls throughout the election campaign and emerged victorious in the first round on April 22 with hardly 28 per cent votes for the incumbent President, Mr Nicolas Sarkozy. The high turnout of voters also helped Mr Hollande win the crucial battle of the ballot. The French, being scared of expected austerity measures to be imposed by the European Union because of poor economic performance of their country, wanted a person who could prevent this denouement and they believed Mr Hollande had the capacity to do so because of his socialist leanings. Though French voters gave the second position to Mr Sarkozy in the first round when eight of the 10 contenders were eliminated, they did not like him because of his brash style of functioning and carelessness on the economic front. The growing rate of unemployment has been the main concern of the voters. This is where the real challenge lies for the new President. He will have to take quick and effective measures so that unemployment — 10 per cent at present — comes down considerably. Mr Hollande does not have much experience as an administrator. He will have to find the right advisers who can help devise a strategy for infusing new life into the French economy. The French Presidential election has been watched keenly by political observers all over the world because of France being the second most important economy of the European Union and one of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. All eyes were fixed on the Socialist challenger of Mr Sarkozy as he demonstrated the capacity to defeat the incumbent President since the very beginning. But it is believed that the election outcome is, in fact, the people’s verdict against Mr Sarkozy. The Socialist candidate got advantage of the voters’ disenchantment with the incumbent President.
|
|
|
Regional is national
The
59th National Film Awards have gone truly national, with regional films getting their due in different categories. The awards are no more dominated by Hindi cinema, as has been the case for many years. This year when ‘Byari’ received the Best Feature Film Award with Marathi film Deool, it established a new trend — of regional cinema asserting its presence over the big budget productions of mainstream cinema. This was vindication of their worth. ‘Byari,’ in which the characters speak a little known language which is not even among the registered languages of India — a mix of Kannada-Telugu-Malayalam-Urdu dialect, and deals with serious issues of child marriage, patriarchy and overbearing religious laws, has broken many established myths about good cinema. ‘Deool,’ which split the best feature film honours with ‘Byari,’ is equally bold and strikes at parochial religious dogmas. The best director’s award went to first-timer Gurvinder Singh for the Punjabi film ‘Anhey Ghorey Da Daan,’ based on a novel by Jnanpith award winner Gurdial Singh, which portrays the suffering of the poor in a fresh visual language which is full of beguiling touches. These are sure signs of maturing of Indian cinema. The national awards, set up in 1954, were aimed at nurturing films in regional languages which survive on shoe-string budgets and need to be fiercely guarded against the onslaught of big budgets and star- packaged corporate might, which now controls the big ticket cinema. In this regard, this year’s awards re-established the role of national awards. Yet, rightly, mainstream cinema was not ignored. Vidya Balan received the Best Actress Award for her role in ’The Dirty Picture,’ ‘I Am’ received the best Hindi feature film award for the relevance of its subject. Now, since good cinema is being made and recognised nationally, it just needs audience in good numbers.
|
|
|
Be thine own palace, or the world's thy jail. — John Donne
|
Hostages to fortune The
fiasco over the proposed National Centre for Counter-Terrorism last week appears to have less to do with “federalism” than petty political pique on the part of state governments that want to settle real and imagined scores with the Centre. The prime example of blackmail is Mamata Banerjee’s wanting a three-year debt bailout from the Centre “or else”! If Mamata blames 34-years of Left rule for Bengal’s bankruptcy, her own stewardship of the Railway Ministry earlier and, now, as Chief Minister hardly offers a shining example of financial prudence. Likewise, Narendra Modi. He has so misused the police and state machinery for partisan ends that he dare not let something like the NCTC intrude into his dubious domain. Many others are indulging in political gamesmanship and seeking bargaining chips with which to confront the Centre. The stubborn failure of the states in undertaking police reform shows that many chief ministers do not want the police to function as instruments of the rule of law but to remain subject to manipulation by the rule of men for personal and party-political aggrandisement. The recent spate of Maoist hostage-taking and brutal murder of innocents across several states shows that while Naxals operate under a unified command and to a common purpose, namely people’s war and class annihilation, the states are handicapped for acting separately and piecemeal in tackling a common interstate and national menace. While the Maoists are quick to criticise maladministration and lack of development, the pattern of abductions and killing shows that they fear administrative penetration into interior areas, certainly good administration, and wish to thwart connectivity and development so as to sustain their “cause” of fighting historic exploitation and neglect. Despite the Centre proposing amendments to the standing operating procedures pertaining to the NCTC that would build Centre-state jointness into the process, the states baulked and the best offer made was that a sub-committee of CMs be set up to study the matter further. This is unexceptionable but for the fact that this is a suggestion that could have been made ab initio. So, for the moment the score has moved from deuce to advantage Maoists. The other question raised but not meaningfully discussed by and with the CMs is whether there is need for a common, national hostage policy or, more accurately, a national hostage strategy, in dealing with Maoists, terroists, jihadis, insurgents, hijackers, whomsoever. To negotiate is not to surrender but serves to gain time to discover something of the where, why, how and what and the mindset of the perpetrators even while preparing for a counter-strike. Low-cost bargains might be struck as innocent lives cannot be lightly shed and popular and police/SF morale is important. The matter should not be shelved but must be meaningfully pursued as much planning, organisation, equipping and coordination across states, national boundaries and jurisdictions is required and a national consensus established. If the states have shown self-serving negativism, the Centre has scarcely covered itself with glory. The Inter-State Council under Article 263, a handy mechanism to resolve federal issues and build consensus on inter-state matters, has remained more or less dormant. Even otherwise, circulation of draft policy papers and convening special meetings of CMs to consider them has not been done to the extent necessary or in a timely manner. The Centre cannot play the role of a distant Uncle but must act as a partner and friend. The Centre has administratively initiated certain actions to beef up the law and order component of the anti-Maoist campaign. This is certainly a necessary but insufficient condition for success. The most backward and worst Naxal-affected areas have been mapped out and are being given special funds and personnel to bolster the administration, develop essential infrastructure and stimulate development. Idealistic youth of high competence are also being trained to serve in these areas. These measures are not to be scoffed at but beg the question in an important sense. It is moot to raise the question of “root causes”. This is often used as a ploy to evade facing issues squarely. Yet root causes cannot be brushed aside and vital pre-history ignored. This, alas, is what has happened in considering the Naxal question. The tribal people were foremost in resisting colonial rule in defence of their historic rights. So it was no surprise that at Independence the Founding Fathers negotiated and wrote a special social contract with tribal India in the Constitution. This was incorporated in the Sixth Schedule for the Northeast and the Fifth Schedule for the rest of India. The Fifth Schedule carved out a wholly separate administrative, legal, representative and financial regime for these regions with oversight entrusted to Governors acting directly under the guidance of the President of India. This protocol was to be both a shield and an enabler for the peace, tranquillity and orderly and equitable development of these areas for the common good. The Governor was vested with special powers to screen and bar any or all legislation, Central and state, in their application to the Scheduled Areas. Tribal advisory councils were to be created with a special role. The Governor was required to make an annual report to the President on the governance of these areas which, after deliberations, not excluding parliamentary scrutiny, could be returned with directives for further action. Special funding could be charged (not voted) under Article 275 and gram sabhas were to be nodal points in administration and for granting permission for exploitation of natural resources. Tragically, the entire scheme was officially trashed quite early on at the Centre and in the states. Governors are today strangers to tribal governance, and national and state laws override tribal jurisdiction. Tribal advisory councils have been co-opted. Governors’ reports are a dead letter. The gram sabhas, despite being reinforced under the Panchayat Extension to Scheduled Areas Act, 1995 (PESA), have been bypassed. And as punishment stations, these areas are grossly under-administered, under-policed and under-developed though open to the ravages of unregulated and illegal resource plunder and excesses by the mining, forest, minor forest produce and liquor mafia. The vacuum created by the state’s retreat was filled by the Naxals who play Robin Hood to exploit tribal (and Dalit) grievances until these innocent people are firmly in their grip. The analysis given here has been repeated earlier and subsequently by official commissions and committees only to be ignored. The restoration of the basic constitutional, legal, administrative, financial and grassroots framework of the Fifth Schedule is absolutely essential to partnership in progress and overcoming Naxal hegemony in tribal India. A single-line administration with specially selected, trained and rewarded cadres is also necessary on the lines of the former Indian Frontier Administrative Service. And, finally, corporate India that wants to and is needed for converting the mineral, water, forest and bio-diversity wealth of the Fifth Schedule areas into jobs, incomes and infrastructure can and must be made a partner instead of being treated as an enemy in order to help build the future of and for tribal
India.
|
||||||
For the love of dog! When
a billionaire heiress leaves $12 million in her will to her dog and nothing to her brother, it leaves one gaping in astonishment. One might think that it is a random case, but it happens more often than you would think. Nowadays a lot of people have provisions in their will for their pets just like their children. Doesn't it make you wonder what is it about dogs that make such a fool out of some of us? I'm one such fool. My household doesn't seem complete without a hairy, sloppy and slobbering creature. My closet is filled with half-chewed shoes and most of my socks are missing its pair. I've started hiding the cushions as my overgrown pup thinks it's a game to run with them and have the entire family chase him. Homework gets chewed up and food gets stolen off the fork midway from the plate to the mouth. Sometimes my coats look like they're made of fur, dog fur! He loves to smell flowers, and if he likes the smell he gets tempted to take a bite out of them. He hates them being in pots and so he digs them out of the pots. He's a firm believer in plants growing in their wild state the way nature intended. One might ask why I live in this insanity. The answer is simple. I love my dog! Each day with my dog is a lesson in unconditional love, acceptance and faithfulness. He has taught me that it's the simple things in life that give the maximum pleasure. However, cashing in on this love and affection is the pet care industry. Despite the slowdown in the economy, this industry has continued to grow in revenue terms. In the US alone, in 2011, pet expenditure is estimated at $50.84 billion. When I moved to the US almost two decades ago, I was astounded by the huge pet stores. I had not seen anything of this kind before. These stores sell everything imaginable, from food to toys to clothes to toiletries to make your dog feel special
and loved. In fact, just recently I left my dog for boarding at a new place and I was asked what kind of TV shows my dog would prefer to watch during his stay. Needless to say, my jaw dropped almost to my chest! Since when did dogs have favourite shows was my thought? I told them that my dog was of a different kind and so he would rather play outside than watch TV. These are the days of pet psychics, dog whisperers, pet spas, pet designer boutiques, and pet jewellers and, believe it or not, even dog orthodontists. Fashion houses like Chanel and Dior have also jumped on the bandwagon and have a pet accessory line. In such an environment a dog can go through its entire inheritance pretty fast if it's not
careful!
|
||||||
Discrimination begins before birth
Since
Amartya Sen first brought global attention in the 1990s to Asia's "missing women," the problem of prenatal sex selection has worsened in a number of countries in the region, with some reporting up to 25 per cent more births of boys than girls. In recent decades, the issue of increasingly imbalanced sex ratios at birth has caused concern, starting in a number of Asian countries, but now also spreading beyond that region. Today, an estimated 117 million women across Asia are "missing." Although this trend is concentrated in countries of South Asia and South-east Asia (India, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, China and Vietnam), we are now seeing an emerging prevalence of the problem in some countries of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. Regardless of its origins or the forces that perpetuate it, prenatal sex selection is gender discrimination at its worst. Tens of millions of female foetuses have been aborted over the past generation, as new technologies have made it easier for parents to identify the sex of a foetus. The resulting skewed sex ratios at birth have been especially pronounced in countries, such as India, even though such prenatal sex screening is illegal. In addition to being a symptom and perpetuator of extreme gender inequality, prenatal sex selection brings many other ills to society. For example, many men in India and China will soon face the prospect of not finding brides. The sex imbalance in these and other countries threatens to increase trafficking of women, and this in turn increases women's vulnerability to domestic and sexual violence, all of which reinforce inequalities and can propel discrimination for generations. Much has been undertaken in affected regions, by governments, civil society, communities and academia, to halt the trends and address the human rights, social policy and public health dimensions. At the international level, the issue was addressed in the Programme of Action of the 1994 Cairo International Conference on Population and Development. UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, has focused on the issue since the 1991, first at country and then, regional levels. UNFPA has been working with a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including community networks that advocate against sex selection and sensitize health-care providers, and faith-based organizations that help raise awareness of the problem and how it reinforces discriminatory attitudes towards women and girls. Many countries have undertaken extensive measures to meet the challenge through actions to reduce the preference of sons. For example, conditional cash transfers for parents of daughters, advocacy campaigns, or policies to empower women and improve their access to social security schemes, including pension systems. Improving gender equality and enforcing national laws and policies on banning sex- selective procedures requires urgent concerted efforts by all segments of government and society as a matter of rights and for charting each country's own development process. It requires strong political commitment as well as actions downstream at the community level to address complex socio-economic and cultural realities. And we must thank the groups and partners that have led and rallied to India's campaign against sex selection. We must accelerate our efforts and give priority to actions and policies that foster norms of gender equality and demonstrate a zero tolerance for prenatal sex selection. Gender equality is at the very
heart of each country's development process. Empowered women and girls contribute to the health and productivity of families and communities and improve prospects for the next generations. Empowered women also propel economic growth. Therefore, we must all join forces to ensure that sex selection is understood as discrimination against women and girls and to put a stop to it once and for all. I reaffirm UNFPA’s commitment to join hands with governments, civil society and other partners in their efforts to reduce and ultimately eliminate this harmful, discriminatory practice. (Courtesy: UN Information Centre for India and Bhutan) — Dr. Babatunde Osotimehin is an Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Director, UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund.
|
|
Three strategies to win the battle Over
the last several decades the only social indicator that is relentlessly refusing to respond positively to the concerted actions is the gender ratio. The number of girls to 1,000 boys has consistently reduced since Independence,in spite of a host of initiatives taken up by the government, both at the centre and in the states, as also by NGOs to reverse the trend. The last census saw child sex ratio dropping to a disturbing low at 914 from 976 in 1961. It is surprising to learn that of the 7 parliamentary districts of Delhi, South Delhi, has the worst gender ratio even though it is the wealthiest and the most educated. Similarly, Chandigarh, one of the cities with highest social indices, has one of the lowest child sex ratio at 818 girls to 1,000 boys. The trend cuts across communities and geographies. To change this trend, firstly, we need to turn around the current PNDT (Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques) Act by changing a fundamental premise of the act, which prohibits the disclosure of the sex of the unborn child whenever ultrasonography is done for whatever reason. Currently, the law invokes penal action against anyone who discloses the gender of the unborn foetus, arguing that by not disclosing the gender of the foetus, the chances of protecting the girl are greater. Whilst the intent behind the law was good, the ground reality is that through a variety of ingenious methods ultra sound clinics inform expecting parents the sex of the child. In a dramatically different approach, what is now being suggested is that since confidentiality has not worked, it is time that we changed the approach to one of complete disclosure and transparency. By disclosing the sex of the child, the family, the community and the administration would then have to accept responsibility of ensuring that the child is protected, particularly, if it happens to be a girl. Let penal provisions be activated on whosoever is responsible for eliminating the unborn or infant girl. Secondly, the government must ensure that the laws are gender-neutral. A thought that merits consideration is to ask the Attorney Generals of every state to submit a compliance report to the Supreme Court or to the Law Ministry that such equality exists within the laws of their respective states. What, in fact must be confirmed is that there is no law that even minimally allows for any form of gender inequality. Lastly, if we are to turn the terms of trade in favour of girls and women, it is about time that we brought work done by women at home into the economic model that measures economic activity and, in turn, GDP. As a society we have decided to put no economic worth on homemaking as an activity and thereby undervalue the enormous contribution of women in raising families.Unless economists, social planners and governments recognize the importance of this critical activity and find ways of putting an economic value to it, the contribution of women will continue to be unfairly underestimated. When a woman's contribution is correctly recognized, the economic terms of trade will shift in her favour, and she will then be viewed as an economic asset, which will be her best protection. — The writer is Chairman of Nanhi Chhaan Foundation and Save the Children, India.
|
|
| 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 | |
Prenatal sex selection is driven by deep-rooted cultural norms that favour sons and place a low value on girls. Son preference stems in part from socioeconomic influences and traditions where only sons inherit property and are expected to care for ageing parents, conduct funeral rites and carry on the family name. Daughters are considered a burden by some as they may require dowries and "be of no benefit" to their families once they are married. These cultural and economic forces create huge pressures on women to produce sons, which ultimately affect women's sexual and reproductive lives with implications for their health and survival. It also puts women in a position where they are forced to perpetuate the lower status of girls through son preference.