The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Arrest of Jagan Reddy
Congress faces an uphill task

The arrest of YSR Congress president and member of Parliament Jagan Mohan Reddy in Hyderabad in a disproportionate assets case will predictably have far-reaching impact on politics in Andhra Pradesh. No longer can the Congress count Andhra Pradesh as its bastion with Jagan Mohan Reddy making serious inroads into its vote banks. With byelections for 18 assembly seats and one Lok Sabha seat due in the State on June 12, the stakes are high both for the Congress and the YSR Congress. The results of these byelections could well be a trend-setter for the 2014 Lok Sabha polls. For Jagan Mohan Reddy this would indeed be a do-or-die battle. While success in these electoral battles will raise his stock among Congressmen sitting on the sidelines, failure to build up public revulsion against the Congress would prove his waterloo. The arrest by the CBI will possibly bring him dividends through the sympathy factor especially in the Rayalaseema region where his family has been traditionally strong.

There is no doubt that with declared assets of Rs 367 crore thanks to investments in power, infrastructure, cement, rice, real estate and media, Jagan Mohan is surrounded by controversies. That much of this money was amassed when his late father YSR Rajasekhar Reddy was Chief Minister gives rise to suspicion that there was massive misuse of position. But would Jagan Mohan have landed in the soup had he continued to support the ruling dispensation is a question that begs an answer. Where was the CBI when Rajasekhar Reddy and his family were amassing wealth at the cost of the public exchequer and why is it that it is so active today? Will the proceedings against Jagan Mohan go on at snail’s pace as disproportionate assets cases against U.P. Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav and former Chief Minister Mayawati have gone on or would they be fast-tracked because he is on the wrong side of the Central and state establishments?

Clearly, the Congress is on the back foot in Andhra Pradesh. With Telangana on the boil, Jagan Mohan Reddy gaining strength and Chief Minister Kiran Kumar Reddy seemingly unequal to the challenges that he faces, this Congress bastion is truly in danger unless something dramatic happens.

Rights of disabled
Employment is of key concern

A significant percentage of India’s population, nearly 2.13 per cent, suffers from some or the other disability. Yet neither societal attitudes nor the working of the government machinery reflects their concerns. Instead of going out of the way to create an enabling mechanism for the people with special needs, the Haryana government has not even cared to fill the posts meant for physically challenged. The large number of vacant positions in government departments reserved for people with special needs not only mocks at the administration’s resolve to fill the posts, but also proves that it is willing to do precious little beyond lip service. While the government’s earlier move to ban the word “handicapped” is in the right spirit, it must be realised that gainful employment is one of the core issues concerning the rights of the disabled.

Not that Haryana is the only state that is a culprit. A large majority of the state governments remain indifferent to the plight of the disabled. So much so that only 14 states have appointed full-time Disability Commissioners. Certainly, legislations have been passed from time to time to enable the disabled to lead a life of dignity. While the National Policy for Persons with Disabilities recognises that persons with disabilities are valuable human resource, the Union Cabinet even widened the definition of disabled children in the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act. However, the ground realities are not in sync with what exists on paper. While there is a clamour and genuine need for a new law, the implementation of existing laws leave much to be desired.

Examples like that of the visually impaired Ajit Kumar who made it to the prestigious civil services exemplify that disability need not become a stumbling block to success. Given the right environment and disabled friendly laws, this section of population can become productive members of society. While special job placement fairs as promised by the Haryana government can yield fruitful results, what is most needed is an earnest will. It’ about time we shed prejudices and discrimination regarding the employment of people with special needs in varied fields.

Thought for the Day

Happiness is having a large, loving, caring, close-knit family in another city.

— George Burns

ARTICLE

Withdrawing from S. China Sea?
India’s credibility is at stake
by Harsh V. Pant

There are reports that India is planning to withdraw from joint oil exploration with Vietnam in the South China Sea. Although no formal announcement has been made yet to this effect, Indian officials have been suggesting that the oil block 128 has not shown promising results, so commercially it makes sense to withdraw. At a time when the South China Sea is the focal point of regional turmoil in East Asia, India’s decision will have repercussions far beyond the mere technicalities of hydrocarbon production. Even if there may be no oil in this joint effort, the way it is being announced is bound to be interpreted that India has no stomach for challenging China in its backyard. Hanoi has already suggested that New Delhi’s decision is a response to pressure from China.

It was just last year that New Delhi had asserted its rights in the international waters of the South China Sea, signalling a deepening of its engagement with Vietnam. The Indian External Affairs Minister had snubbed China, making it clear that India’s ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL) will continue to pursue oil and natural gas exploration in two Vietnamese blocks in the South China Sea. Asking countries “outside the region” to stay away from the South China Sea, China had issued a demarche to India underlining that Beijing’s permission should be sought for exploration in Blocks 127 and 128 and that without it, OVL’s activities would be considered illegal. Vietnam, meanwhile had underlined the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to claim its sovereign rights over the two blocks being explored. India decided to go by Vietnam’s claims and ignore China’s objections.

India’s bold move was aimed at asserting India’s legal claims in the international waters of the South China Sea as well as strengthening its relationship with Vietnam. Both moves unsettled China which views India’s growing engagement in East Asia with suspicion. India’s decision to explore hydrocarbons with Vietnam had come after an unidentified Chinese warship had demanded that INS Airavat, an amphibious assault vessel, identify itself and explain its presence in the South China Sea after the vessel left Vietnamese waters. The Indian warship was completing a scheduled port call in Vietnam and was in international waters. Though the Indian Navy promptly denied that a Chinese warship had confronted its assault vessel as reported by London’s Financial Times, it did not completely deny the factual basis of the report.

China has collided with Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and the Philippines in recent months over issues related to the exploitation of the East China Sea and the South China Sea for mineral resources and oil. It was under American guardianship of common interests for the last several decades that China has emerged as the economic powerhouse it is today. Now it wants a new system—a system that only works for Beijing and does not deal with the provision of public goods or common resources. With its moves in the South China Sea, India too is challenging China’s claims.

If the display of backbone in pursuing joint oil exploration with Vietnam, despite Chinese objections, had helped India, strengthening relations with Vietnam and forcing others to acknowledge as a credible player in the region, the unceremonious announcement of withdrawal will not only disappoint Hanoi but also put into question the whole idea of India as a regional balancer in the Indo-Pacific region. The smaller states in East and Southeast Asia have been looking to New Delhi to manage China’s rise. Unless managed carefully, India’s credibility will come into question.

To control the damage to its reputation from this sudden volte face, India should make it clear to Hanoi that, despite this decision, it would continue to expand its strategic ties with Vietnam. After all, both nations have stakes in ensuring sea-lane security as well as shared concerns about Chinese access to the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea. As the South China Sea become a flashpoint, Hanoi has been busy courting its erstwhile rival, the US, and Washington DC has been asking India to “not just look east but also to engage east and act east as well.” Solidarity among major powers on South China Sea disputes is essential to force China to moderate its maximalist position on this issue.

China is too big and too powerful to be ignored by the regional states. But the states in China’s vicinity are now seeking to expand their strategic space by reaching out to other regional and global powers. Smaller states in the region are now looking to India to act as a balancer in view of China’s growing influence and America’s anticipated retrenchment from the region in the near future, while larger states see India as an attractive engine for regional growth. To live up to its full potential and meet the region’s expectations, India must do a more convincing job of emerging as a credible strategic partner of the region.

It is dangerous in international relations to allow an impression to develop that New Delhi can be browbeaten into submission. If China can operate in India’s backyard and systematically expand its influence, then there is no reason why India should feel diffident about operating in areas that China considers its own sphere of influence. India’s diffidence in foreign policy remains the reason why despite pursuing a ‘Look East’ policy for the last two decades, it continues to be a marginal player in East Asian geopolitics.

The writer teaches at King’s College, London.

MIDDLE

Debate of a different kind
by Ehsan Fazili

It was May 28, 1979, when as a student I first entered the prestigious Women's College, M A Road, Srinagar. Obviously, not as a student of the college, but as a participant in an inter-college debate on the death anniversary of Jawaharlal Nehru. The event was held a day later, as the anniversary fell on a Sunday.

Much water has flown down the Jhelum since then, bringing a sea of change. On the occasion a number of students, two from almost each degree college of the Kashmir valley, participated in the debate.

Enthusiasm overwhelmed most of the participants to speak for or against the proposition. Entry of the participants to the college, particularly the boys, unravelled many preconceived ideas about the atmosphere and culture of this prestigious institution.

Accompanied by one of my college-mates, senior to me by one year and led by a teacher of the English Department of our college, when we entered the "guarded premises", it was a new and unique experience. I felt shaky as the stage this time was bigger one. Many of my teachers from school days had been instrumental in encouraging me to do away with my"Leo shyness" and come forward boldly. Credit goes to them all for my participation in such programmes, though in a little way.

The moment three of us entered the college premises, I felt really ragged in a different way. "Kaisay kaisay log aaye hein… Yeh stage sey gir jayengay…", remarked a student of the college as we reached in front of the main office building on our way to the auditorium.

Silence, however, prevailed as we moved ahead. The only resort was to be in the "safe zone" of the auditorium where the debate was conducted and a decent atmosphere prevailing in view of the expected arrival of the then Governor of the state. The Governor, however, could not make it due to some disturbance which had taken place at the campus of the University of Kashmir.

For me it was the only debate of a different kind as my audience was a mix of men and women, including teachers and students. Thankfully, participants like me did not fall from the stage and most of the boys distinguished themselves.

Since then it has been a long journey and the college premises presented a different face on my recent visit. One of my college teachers, who taught me English literature during his early years of service, wished me to see him on his last day of active service before superannuation. He headed the college for less than a year. A mix of happiness and grandeur loaded with a stock of more than three decades of teaching experience was overwhelming. It was contrary to the old experiences.

OPED — SOCIETY

A house divided for Mrs and Mr
Are women recognised as equal actors inside the institution of marriage? Success of the new Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, which ensures half a share for woman in her husband's residential property depends on how this question is answered by other institutions and the society in general.
Jamal Kidwai

THE Union Cabinet has made some significant amendments to the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, the most radical amongst them being that in the case of divorce, a woman will get half a share in her husband's residential property, regardless of whether the property was acquired before or during the marriage. The spirit behind this amendment is to empower and encourage women by giving them financial security and thus the option to seek divorce when they are in an unhappy marriage and/or a marriage which is abusive and violent. This is truly a progressive amendment and should be welcomed not only by women's groups but also by all progressive and liberal individuals.

Having said that, our past experience shows that when it comes to the empowerment and protection of minorities like women, dalits, tribals and Muslims, laws in themselves are not enough. This is because of several reasons. First, laws are used and implemented by people who are guided by highly entrenched feudal and patriarchal values. Such laws will have very little effect unless they are backed by strong social and political movements that not only challenge an everyday largely patriarchal way of life but also work for sustained reforms in religious and culture practices.

For nearly a decade, I have been engaged with a legal aid cell in the district of Jehanabad in Bihar. This district is infamous for caste massacres and gender atrocities. The cell has assisted over 500 women who are victims of gender atrocities, the majority of whom live in far-flung villages, earn their livelihood as landless agricultural labourers and belong to dalit and Muslim communities. Coming from such vulnerable backgrounds, they have to gather lot of courage to report acts of atrocities committed on them by their husbands and/or in-laws.

The social bias

We have found, more often than not, that the lawyers, instead of discharging their duties, fighting cases and getting justice for these women, end up becoming marriage counsellors who tell the abused women that such things happen in marriage and they should make efforts to "adjust" for the sake of their children and family. The attitude of the district judge and the police is no different. But leave alone district lawyers and judges, such regressive attitudes towards gender roles is best highlighted by the Supreme Court ruling in the case Samar Ghosh vs Jaya Ghosh of 2007 where the court held that the woman's refusal to cohabit with her husband and refuse sex amounted to cruelty!

Secondly, one of the essential conditions for any law to be effective in letter and spirit is to spread enough information and awareness about the law and its provisions amongst the target group. Take the case of the Domestic Violence Act (DV Act). In the context of gender justice, like the present Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, the DV Act is also considered a landmark law. I can, with all responsibility, state that very few lawyers or police personnel in Jehanabad know what the DV Act is all about. Nor is there any awareness among the women who are victims of violence.

A standard practice with lawyers dealing with acts of domestic violence is to lodge a case against the husband under 498A (commonly known as the Dowry Act). The reason is simple: if conviction takes place under 498A the punishment will be much harsher. Therefore, the lawyers either use 498A to blackmail and pressurise the guilty husband to "reform" or, as happens in many cases, take a bribe from the accused husbands to mediate an out- of -court settlement. Instead of ensuring justice and empowering the woman, these laws become a tool handy for lawyers to earn an extra income.

The same old patriarchy

A combination of ignorance, societies bound by tradition and patriarchy and a highly corrupt police and civil administration can be a deadly cocktail to subvert laws like the Marriage laws (Amendment) Bill and at times work to the disadvantage of women. A guilty husband can transfer the property to someone else's name to ensure that the woman doesn't get the share. And in a poor country like India, it's highly likely that the husband may not have any property at all. And given the systemic corruption and bureaucratic delays that the Indian courts are infamous for, to protect his property the guilty husband can easily succeed in delaying divorce proceedings. This, in turn will extend the suffering of the woman who is seeking divorce.

Finally, whether poor or rich, women are by and large discouraged by families and society to seek divorce. Go to any legal aid cell for women in India and they will tell you how a majority of women give up the fight mid- way because they neither have the resources nor the social support structures to sustain the long-drawn out torturous process of legal redress. There is a provision for such a shelter under the DV Act, but it exists just on paper. Therefore, it is the duty of the state not only to provide such courageous women and their children access to safe shelter, but also avenues for education for children, livelihood for women and other support structures essential for leading a dignified life.

Without such support structures, political mobilisation, reform and large-scale awareness campaigns the Marriage Laws (Amendment ) Bill will fall way short of fulfilling the desired objective.

(The author is the Director of AMAN Trust)

Who will benefit from this law?
Urvashi Butalia

A few weeks ago I found myself in a court as an attesting witness in a property dispute case. It was my first time ever inside a courtroom. Before my turn came to be called up to the podium, another woman came in, and was called up to be cross questioned. She was accompanied by two young men - probably her son and a nephew. They both touched her feet, another came in soon after, all three stood protectively behind her as she went up. And then the lawyer - at least six inches taller than her - began to shout questions at her. Clearly a woman from a small town, and not elite or prosperous, she was immediately intimidated, and became tongue tied because of the shouting. And everyone watched.

I tried to imagine what it must be like for a woman seeking divorce, or one facing sexual violation and/ or rape. Being at the receiving end of aggressive, intrusive questions, having them virtually thrown at you, being made to feel you are the one in the wrong, that the men had only done what was expected of them, what was 'manly'. And I wondered how we could even begin to think of expecting justice or even fair play, if those in the legal profession, their counterparts dispensing justice, remain so blind to women's particular problems. And that's the crux really, no matter how strong a law, it's implementation on the ground that gives it strength and meaning.

Its not about law

That's why there has not been unqualified appreciation on the part of women activists for the recent, and somewhat positive, changes in the divorce law cleared by the cabinet. The new Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill will give the woman half a share in her husband's residential property, whether such property was acquired before the marriage or during it. In doing this the new law recognises an important principle: the right of the woman to matrimonial property, and in doing this it also recognises her contribution, whether monetary or otherwise, to the creation of such property.

This is, without doubt, a positive move, but there is, nevertheless, some cause for concern. Activists now know from long experience that getting a positive law in place is really only the first step, and a great deal of thought and discussion needs to go into the question of how, whether at all, the implementation of the law will work. This has not happened in this case, and so the question remains an open one.

Perhaps there were some lessons to be learnt from the other law that pays attention to this important aspect - the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (2005) under which the victim of domestic violence has the right to stay on in her shared home, and to claim expenses for living. Brought in as a result of pressure by the women's movement, this law and its implementation are being carefully monitored by activists to see how such changes actually work on the ground. Did the government look at this aspect at all? If yes, why was there no transparency about it?

Concerns are layered

There are other concerns too - and many of these are social and political. Will the letter of the law change the way implementing officers think of women? Will women, in effect, be recognised as equal actors inside the institution of marriage? How many women will actually stake a claim to matrimonial property, and on whom will they be able to rely for support on this? Further, wily families, and wily husbands will, no doubt find a way out of this. The law on bigamy is easy enough to flout by the simple step of changing your religion. A concern in this one could be that husbands may find ways of alienating their property so that the woman can then not stake a claim to it.

All of these are legitimate, and no doubt the next few months will see considerable discussion on the many aspects of these amendments, and on other aspects that the amendments include. But it is a measure of the maturity of the women's movement that such measures are now greeted with a cautious mix of appreciation and concern. And that activists immediately begin to look at how they will pan out on the ground and what is needed to bring about real change.

It's also left to activists to point out the things the law does not say, or the people it does not touch. What are the rights of women abandoned, not necessarily formally divorced, but effectively left on their own, or what are the rights of women whose husbands do not own property? Long years ago - perhaps fifteen or twenty years ago, I recall the State trying to bring in changes in the marriage law that recognised a 'breakdown' of a relationship as a legitimate cause for a split. The proposal to bring in the Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Act was at the time opposed by women activists - women of our mothers' generation - who cautioned that given the patterns of migration in our country, this would allow men to leave behind one wife in a city or town or village, take another elsewhere, and have no responsibility towards any of them. At the time, they were painfully aware that the woman left behind was abandoned anyway, but for her, to have at least the 'cachet' of marriage, was better than to be called an abandoned woman. When it comes to 'divorced' status, things have not changed much.

(The writer is director of Zubaan Books, an imprint of Kali For Women)