The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Haryana’s seedy affairs
Onus on govt to prove CDs fake

Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda on Monday assured the state Assembly of ‘zero tolerance’ towards corruption. The fact, however, is that the step he has taken to probe the latest CD scandal that has rocked his government is of zero value. Handing a case of patent criminality to the Lokayukta — which has little wherewithal to probe even minor cases — shows the government is not keen to find out the truth. The first thing to be established is whether the CDs showing at least eight Congress MLAs or leaders demanding money to arrange CLU permissions are genuine. The easiest way would be to go to a Central forensic laboratory. The Lokayukta has been given irrelevant terms of reference — to establish if CLUs were granted as sought or money was paid. These issues can come up in a police investigation later. In fact, why should the Lokayukta be given any terms of reference at all, and not a free hand?

The very presence of the CDs and their content is prima facie enough to order a criminal investigation. And as the ruling party's own members are involved, the probe should be handed over to the CBI. The Haryana Government did not earn any credibility by asking state cadre IAS officers to inquire into the actions taken by Ashok Khemka in the Vadra land deal case. It is time to redeem itself. Asking the INLD — which has its own agenda — to lodge a complaint is meaningless. When its credibility is at stake, why can the government not take suo motu action?

Proximity to the National Capital has earned Haryana a lot of revenue. But it has also given opportunity for tongues to wag regarding the manner in which CLUs have been granted. The Congress' own MP from Gurgaon has hinted at rampant irregularities. Amidst the conspiracy of silence between developers and agents in the government, very little evidence comes out. It is for the first time there may be concrete proof. The immediate task for the government, thus, is to prove the CDs fake. If not — whatever the courts may say — people would not need any more proof of guilt.

Myth of Sati
India has no place for it

No doubt, religion is a private matter, at best left to the religious community which practises it. But when there is a danger that some religious acts could send out wrong signals and seriously undermine the position of women, society can't turn a blind eye. Not surprising, women and social activists of Haryana have come down heavily against the proposed temple to be built at a cost of Rs 9 crore at the local Rani Sati Dadi temple in Hisar. Their argument that the move would glorify the social evil of Sati is both reasonable and justified.

The abominable practice of burning the wife on the pyre of her husband was abolished more than a century ago. Unfortunately, in post-independent India too, there have been instances of women being forced to commit Sati. The example of Roop Kanwar of Deorala village in Rajasthan is fresh in the memory. A village in Chhattisgarh celebrated Sati in 2008. A Sati pyre was kept burning for 247 years by a royal family in Orissa. In Rajasthan, where the infamous Deorala incident happened in 1987, Sati shrine sites not only mushroomed but were also at one time included as tourist destinations by the state’s own tourism campaigns.

Sati, best confined to history, is an archaic tradition modern India can be anything but proud of. In a state like Haryana where women’s position is far from enviable, where honour killings are the order of the day and sex ratio is one of the worst in the country, even the thought of Sati should be banished. While at this point it may not be very clear whether a Sati ritual was performed at the temple site or not, the administration would do well to check the construction of the temple before things spiral out of control. The myth of Sati has to be done away with at all levels and not just in the legal parlance.

Thought for the Day

When we ask for advice, we are usually looking for an accomplice. — Saul Bellow

ARTICLE

Tackling financial crisis
PM should reformulate economic policies
by Kuldip Nayar

THAT India is an economic mess is known all over the world. What is not yet public is that the malaise was because of the wrong decisions which President Pranab Mukherejee took when he was Union Finance Minister from January 2009 to mid-2012 and when Finance Minister P. Chidambaram was heading the ministry nearly till the end of 2008 and before.

Mukherjee lives in the luxuries of Rashtrapati Bhavan and Chidambaram shields himself behind tall promises he still makes to mend the economy.

Both of them are accountable. They should tell why they took the steps which disturbed the rhythm of progress. Because of lack of transparency in the affairs of the government, only a handful of people know about the blunders the two committed.

One of the decisions taken by Mukherjee was to impose the Rs. 1200-crore tax with retrospective effect on a foreign mobile company. After having lost the case in the Supreme Court on September 8, 2010, the government promulgated an ordinance before amending the Finance Act 2012. The retrospective clause in the Act has scared away foreign investment which India badly needs. A bagful of concessions has not brought Walmart yet to Indian soil. Foreign investors have withdrawn a large sum of money which they had invested. In a few weeks, as much as $200 billion has reportedly gone out. The outflow has not stopped yet.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh did not anticipate the repercussions. In fact, after seeing the mess Chidambaram had created in 2008, the Prime Minister should have taken over the Finance Ministry himself because of his expertise in economic matters. Unfortunately, his own record as Coal Minister does not hold promise but the Prime Minister would have done better in finance.

India should have been exporting coal, as it did, instead of importing it. Manmohan Singh may not be personally responsible for corruption in the allotment of coal blocks. But the bungling runs into thousands of crores of rupees. The full story may not yet come out because some files are missing. The government has admitted this before the Supreme Court. The government uses the word “so-called files”.

According to the CBI, as many as 157 files are missing. The missing files reportedly have some letters and noting on the allotment of coal blocks. The Prime Minister cannot absolve himself of the responsibility that he was not the custodian of the files. He was in charge of the Coal portfolio. A top CBI official, who is probing the scandal, has said that there may be a need to “examine” the Prime Minister, who was in charge of the ministry from 2006 to 2009. Could the Prime Minister have connived at what the ministry had been doing because his personal integrity is beyond reproach?

The Prime Minister could have done something to bring the culprits to book but he could not because he is politically weak. His other fault was that he depended too much on Mukherejee and put him as the chairman of several committees of Group of Ministers, entrusted with the task of finding solutions to intractable problems. Unfortunately, Mukherjee had no time for his own ministry and the situation began to deteriorate.

The crisis has been aggravated by the galloping inflation (10 per cent). An average person whose income had remained what it was even as his expense has gone up because of the ever-increasing prices of essential commodities. His cost of living would have been still higher if the government was not subsiding petrol, diesel, cooking gas and the like. According to the IMF, the 20 per cent of the top in India enjoys more subsidies than the 20 per cent below.

The elite are too powerful to be touched. Top business houses finance many MPs who see to it that no harm comes to them. Lok Sabha elections are due in 10 months’ time. On an average, a Lok Sabha seat requires an expenditure of Rs. 10 crore. The political parties are already in touch with the business houses for funds. How can they challenge them for their malpractices? This is confirmed by the unanimity of all parties in staving off the Chief Information Commissioner's ruling that the RTI (right to information) will be applicable to the working of political parties.

Yet the immediate problem is how to get over the present financial crisis. The Prime Minister has himself admitted in Parliament that “the country is facing a difficult time”. It can justifiably be argued that the bungling is because of the government. There is no governance, no leadership and no guidance. I do not know what reforms the Prime Minister has in mind. He has to reformulate economic policies so that there are employment opportunities, essential goods are cheap and the growth rate, now back to the Hindu growth rate of 4 per cent of the ’50s and ’60s, picks up. Manufacturing is stuck at a mere 3 per cent and a bit of increase is not even a flash in the pan.

I wish there had been fresh elections, as I had argued three months ago. The uncertainty which puts off investors would have been over by now and people would also have settled down to a new elected government. But MPs of most political parties, particularly those of the Congress, want to enjoy the full tenure of five years. Many of them know that they may not be re-elected.

The anxiety over the political scene is casting a shadow on the future. Unless there is a sweep by one party, which does not seem likely, the next government will also be a coalition. It may not be in a position to take hard decisions which India needs to overcome the deepening crisis. That the political parties should have a consensus on the basics goes without saying. But this may not be possible before elections. But that is what the country needs whether it happens now or later. Maybe, I am on the wrong track. Probably, the story of India looks like over, at least for years to come.

MIDDLE

Greenery on fire
by Jupinderjit Singh

I am not a religious person. I am God-fearing though. During my travels, it is never a priority to visit a religious place. It may be because of the historical or architectural importance of the place or out of sheer curiosity. I am attracted more by the mysticism of a place, maybe religious or not. Misty meadows on the hills caressing the dark tresses of the wild attract me more.

I am particularly averse to the loud speakers perched atop religious places in a set of four. The different religious heads may not agree that God is one and all religions are basically one. Still, they are unanimous that religion demands chanting or reciting at a high volume with the loud speakers screaming in all directions.

But there are two places where I wish this practice never stops. One was at the Renuka lake in Nahan. I was sitting on the stairs of the rest house there one evening trying to be at peace with myself. I was looking deep into the valley trying to understand the serenity of the lake despite darkness gulping it like a giant carnivore.

I was startled by a rhythmic drumming and chanting emanating from a temple on the left end of the lake. It echoed in the hills, whose shape is famous as being similar to a sleeping woman, in this case, Mother Renuka. It seemed mother nature was spreading the music of love to all. Years later, I can still feel the ripples of the transcendental experience.

The second place that moved me similarly was Poonch, a forgotten district of Jammu and Kashmir. The country remembers it largely when the Pakistan army opens fire along the LOC on the villages of this district. Far away from the heart of the country, Poonch was in the news recently due to cross-firing on the border.

The lush green valley, the paddy fields with a seasonal river criss-crossing through it provides an enchanting view. The silent valley broke into music as I heard the reciting of Gurbani from a local gurdwara. Soon after, the sound of the Azaan reverberated the soul. The moment it ended, aarti from the temple stirred the soul further towards the oneness of God.

The green valley is on fire these days. The frightening noise of gun shots, mortar shells fills it in the evenings and all night. Those who live far away, in the seats of power, may find it exciting. Some feel that a full-scale war can only silence such off-and-on firing. But the devastation of such a war and bloodshed can only be understood when one visits the hill city.

Poonch, despite having Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims, has rarely participated in communal frenzy and riots. The residents were united even in the face of recent riots in other parts of the state. It is here that I wish loud speakers atop religious places continue to fill the morning and evening atmosphere than the devilish man-made gunshots and rockets. May the world learn from the peaceful co-existence here.

Oped Governance

Uttered, but not spoken, in Parliament
The PM-Jaitley verbal duel generated a controversy. Parliamentarians must take a pragmatic view of expunged remarks in times of instant communication and active electronic media.
KV Prasad

Disruptions and unruly behaviour are common during House proceedings. A file photograph

With the proliferation of round-the-clock news channels in the country beaming live audio-visual proceedings in Parliament and the manner in which news from the hallowed prescient goes viral on the Internet, a dilemma exists in the form of “expunged” comments from the proceedings of either House by the presiding officer.

The latest episode of August 30, when remarks made by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and the Leader of the House in the Rajya Sabha and an equally sharp retort by the Leader of the Opposition, Arun Jaitley, once again offers an opportunity for all those concerned over the supremacy of legislature and Parliament vis-à-vis the freedom of speech and media and contempt of the House to look at the matter with a fresh perspective.

It was a classic dilemma that parliamentary correspondents of daily newspapers and periodicals faced that evening. With due apologies to the Bard of Stratford-upon Avon William Shakespeare, it was a case of “to report or not to report” portions that the Chair of the Raja Sabha removed from the official record of proceedings and circulated the official intimation to that effect.

The stinging remark by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and candid observation by Arun Jaitley made in the heat of the verbal duel that engulfed benches across the aisle was a top-draw stuff for most television news channels that kept repeating the news clip soon after its occurrence.

Adding to it was that the choice of words, both by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, was crawling all over cyberspace with almost all websites of newspapers, periodicals and news channels carrying the print version of the engagement that was beamed live, courtesy Rajya Sabha television.

The above mentioned episode brings to fore the need for both parliamentarians and the media to debate afresh on two aspects — efficacy of the decision of the Chair to expunge a word, remark or expression considered unparliamentary in this age of instant communication, and whether a reiteration of event containing a word that finds place in the lexicon of what cannot be said in Parliament be removed without application to context.

Sanctity of remarks

The morning after many newspapers preferred to follow the order of the Chair and scrupulously avoided reporting the words or expression expunged from the interventions, yet some decided to go ahead and publish the actual text containing expunged remarks, thus exposing the organisation to the risk of being hauled up by Parliament for breach of privilege and face the charge of having committed contempt of the House.

Here comes the dilemma. Should media organisations follow the time-honoured practice of not reporting expunged portions and retain the sanctity? Under the Rules 380-382 of the House of the People (Lok Sabha) and corresponding Rules 261-262 in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha), the Chair has the power to review and expunge word(s) and expression(s) considered defamatory or indecent or undignified or unparliamentary.

Article 361 A of the Constitution provides qualified privilege to the media for publishing the brief, accurate and fair reporting of the proceedings, but it will not immune the media from the liability under contempt of the House in case of breach of privilege.

The justification of penal jurisdiction of the Houses of Parliament have been explained in detail both in Erskine May’s Parliamentary Practice which mentions: “Without the power to commit, the privileges of Parliament would not exist in their present form, and it would hardly been possible adequately to defend the dignity of Parliament against disrespect and affronts which could not be brought, or could be brought only by implication, under the head of any of the specific privileges. The power of both Houses to punish Members and non-Members for disorderly and disrespectful acts has much in common with the authority inherit in the superior courts ‘to prevent or punish conduct which tends to obstruct, prejudice or abuse them’ while in the exercise of their responsibilities”.

Similarly, according to MN Kaul and SL Shakdher’s “Practice and Procedure of Parliament”: “Each House of Parliament, as also a House of Legislature of a State, has the power to secure the attendance of persons on matters of privilege and to punish for breach of privilege or contempt of the House and commit the offender to custody or prison… the power… is considered necessary to enable the House to discharge its functions and safeguard its authority and privilege… without such a power, the House would sink into utter contempt and inefficiency”.

Judicial pronouncement also underscored that Article 361 A is not an exception to the immunity guaranteed to the legislators under Article 105 (3) and Article 194 (3). For instance, in the case of MSM Sharma versus Sri Krishna Sinha, Editor, of Searchlight newspaper (AIR 1959 SC 395), the latter approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 stating that the notice of action under breach of privilege violates his fundamental right under Article 19 (1) (a) and also interferes with his personal liberty under Article 32, if arrested in pursuance of the privilege motion. With a majority opinion — dissent note by Justice Subba Rao — the apex court ruled the Assembly had the right to privilege under Article 194 (3) of the Constitution.

Since then there have been a number of cases involving contempt and breach of privilege involving members of the media in Parliament and in the 14th Lok Sabha an Editor was summoned by the Privileges Committee for a comment in the paper against the Speaker, just as in 2006, former Lok Sabha Secretary-General Subhash Kashyap was admonished for casting aspersions on the conduct of the Speaker in a television debate.

Over the years, there have been periodic demands to codify privileges but in its 11th Report on Parliamentary Privileges — Codification and Related Matters’’, the Lok Sabha Committee rejected the need to codify parliamentary privileges. Interestingly, in response to a questionnaire to the panel headed by V Kishore Chandra Deo to a question, “Any other comment/suggestion?”, The Pioneer responded: “The rule regarding publication of expunged remarks by newspapers/periodicals needs to be reviewed’’. The newspaper is edited by Chandan Mitra, a member of the Rajya Sabha.

As the Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, Prof PJ Kurien emphasised: “Sanctity of expunged remarks remains in the official records of the House. Today, when the electronic media is so active it is not possible to retain the sanctity of an expunged remark as in the past.”

However, expressing his personal view, Prof Kurien, who is also Chairman of the Rajya Sabha Privileges Committee, says he believes people have the right to know what a member says during a debate as it reflects his or her “real face”.

On earlier occasions, too, the Rajya Sabha witnessed such wrangling and in one instance, the then Deputy Chairperson Najma Heptulla adjourned the House briefly to review the video clip before ordering its expunction. Like in the case of cricket, the Third Umpire cannot be called upon frequently holding up proceedings.

Deferred telecast, as has been suggested in the past, could be considered to prevent recurrences of such incidents and show a way out of the sceptical comment: “What is the point of expunging remarks when it has been seen live on television?”

Dr Heptulla, who served as the Vice-Chairperson for over a decade, agreed that “expunging remarks in the days of live telecast cannot have the same effect”. In the Manmohan Singh-Jaitley verbal duel, she felt the expressions removed were said by the members in the form of a question, which going by an earlier ruling of the Chair in this session on a different matter, if retained, opens a “Pandora's box” as “tomorrow any member can make statements in the form of a question”.

Unparliamentary word

“Have you heard of any other country where members of the Opposition walk into the well of the House shouting, Prime Minister **** hai, Prime Minister **** hai. These types of things have been said.” The reference by Dr Singh was to the words used by members in the House and factual narration of events of the past. Should it be removed from the official record merely because the word now deleted was found unparliamentary? Should it not have been read it in context?

Perhaps the officials tasked with the job of scanning the record, following demands from Congress MPs to remove objectionable expressions, pointed it out in earnest but they failed to realise that the statement was a matter of fact and said by none other than the Prime Minister who is also the Leader of the House.

Parliament has a compilation of words and expressions deemed unparliamentary. It is time that the method be studied and applied with care and not just as a mechanical sweep of words highlighted by the filter.

Former Lok Sabha Secretary-General PDT Acharya, however, holds the view that any word or expression that has made it to the compilation under unparliamentary expressions/words have to be deleted and cannot be seen in context. “As for carrying expunged remarks, the media cannot use the portions once the Chair has deleted and due information is communicated about it,” Acharya says.