|
|
|
|
|
Shaking off the daze
Sisi’s challenge |
|
|
Should there be Leader of Opposition?
Golfing Burra Sahibs in bunker
Minorities should be Modi’s major concern
Perpetuating stereotypes
|
Shaking off the daze It is never too late to begin a good thing. The Punjab Government is currently on overdrive in its campaign against drugs, which it believes was one of the major factors for its poor showing in the Lok Sabha elections. This is democracy at work. But there are certain dangers that come with taking extreme measures against an extreme situation, which the government should be careful about. Thousands of youths have been arrested on the charge of being drug peddlers, many of who are also addicts. Besides the sheer logistics of handling addicts in custody, there is also the fear of corrupt policemen using the drive to extract money from innocent people. The net effect could be another backlash for the government even as it tries to set things right. Irrespective of its motives, at the moment it seems the government is earnest in its desire to check the drug menace, and must be helped in the endeavour. The Chief Minister has asked all departments concerned, including police, health and education, to work towards creating awareness on the subject and aid the effort. The foremost action has to come from the police, which means its own ranks have to be above suspicion. Towards that end many junior officers up to the rank of Inspector have been dismissed or shifted. Perhaps the top brass need to take a relook at the district police chiefs too, who may have political allegiances, owing to which they may not be able to act against the big fish in the drug racket. The political leadership should not interfere in this purge in the police ranks. In fact, the state DGP should be made responsible for keeping drugs off the streets, but needs to be given a free hand for that. A lasting solution, however, will not come from the police but effective governance. The reasons that led to the situation in the first place have to be removed. Youngsters have to stay in school till 18 years of age, and get a meaningful education there so that they are able to either get employment thereafter or go for higher education. For that the government has to set its house and finances in order.
|
|
Sisi’s challenge Egypt's new President is now firmly ensconced as the leader of the most-populated Arab nation in the world. He won the elections with a percentage of votes that would have been impressive, had it been supported by an equally imposing turnout. According to official figures, less than half of the voters turned up at polling stations. This has taken away some sheen from the victory of Abdel Fatah
al-Sisi, the former Defence Minister who led the coup that ousted Muhammad
Morsi, Egypt's last elected President. The flux that followed the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak in February 2011, including the period during which Muslim Brotherhood's Morsi was elected and later deposed as President, led to a worsening socio-economic situation in Egypt. The stability that the new regime promises may well have got it many votes. An unprecedented extending of the voting period by a day certainly helped, even as it chipped away at the credibility of the electoral processes in which the only opponent who stood against
Sisi, the labour activist Hamdeen Sabahi, got barely 3.5 per cent of the votes. The military which he once headed is firmly behind him. However, Sisi now has to move on the economic front. Foreign direct investment has fallen. The number of tourists has plummeted, amidst security concerns, and foreign reserves have come down to their lowest level yet. Indeed, even staples like bread are in short supply. However, the support that Sisi enjoys from the establishment, especially the military, and his recent electoral success have attracted some institutions and nations that have shown an interest in investing in Egypt again.
Sisi, like many others who assume the mantle of leadership in trying times, may well find that getting to be President was the easy part, the tough test is now to come. It remains to be seen if he can provide the stability that the country needs, and the security that Egyptians seek, even as he jumpstarts a stalled economy, and fulfils the aspirations of the millions who want better living standards. |
|||||
|
Thought for the Day
Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one. —Malcolm Forbes |
|||||
Adulteration of goods
THE adulteration of goods especially foodstuffs has been allowed to proceed unrestricted for too long a time. Few municipal agencies take action against vendors and it is generally believed that a more effective law should be passed by the Government of India empowering local authorities to deal effectively with men who commit this fraud. The Burma Chamber of Commerce has addressed a letter to the local Government pointing out the desirability for passing an Adulteration of Food Act for the whole of India and indicating the various tricks and frauds of adulterators, which in the absence of a special law, could not be prevented. The Chamber has pointed out how other countries as the United States have succeeded in protecting their people more or less effectually from harmful trickery. The Chamber say that articles of food and drink are adulterated on a wholesale scale. The crisis in Canada
THE Ottawa authorities appear to have given orders that "none of the passengers" on board the Komagata Maru are to be admitted no matter what evidence may be procured. It is also stated that although there is a possibility that Indians will return to Hong-Kong, there are differences of opinion among them, and some are developing "an ugly mood." What is meant by "developing an ugly mood," we are not in a position to know at present. As regards the "possibility" of their return Sardar Gurdit Singh did not ignore at the time he resolved upon putting to practical test the reality of his countrymen's rights as British subjects. But what he is going to do in the present contingency is not so important as what we in the Punjab are going to do to support him in his valiant fight for the assertion of the rights of his countrymen. |
Should there be Leader of Opposition? The principle of separation of powers between the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary is enshrined in the Constitution. However, the Constitution does leave room for some overlap between two of these branches, the legislative and the executive which, at times, can create somewhat of an imbalance. The chances of this imbalance increase with large majorities in the legislature because if the ruling party has a large majority, the legislature's ability to keep a check on the activities of the executive on the basis of sheer number of members in the legislature, weakens. That is why institutional mechanisms are needed and one such mechanism is the Leader of Opposition. Another perspective on checks and balances is that it is applicable not only to the three main branches of the state but also within each branch. That is why there are two or three judges on Supreme Court benches, and that is why there is a Cabinet. The same principle holds for the legislature too, and that institutional function is served by the Leader of Opposition. And that is why our Parliament, in its wisdom, passed a law on this issue way back in 1977. This law actually gives a definition of the term “Leader of the Opposition.” Section 2 of the Act reads as follows, "In this Act, 'Leader of the Opposition’, in relation to either House of Parliament, means that member of the Council of States or the House of the People, as the case may be, who is, for the time being, the Leader in that House of the party in opposition to the Government having the greatest numerical strength and recognised as such by the Chairman of the Council of States or the Speaker of the House of the People, as the case may be.” The only other part of Section 2 is an explanation that says that in case two parties have an identical number of members, then the Presiding Officer will decide who shall be the Leader of Opposition. The “experts” have quoted the Lok Sabhas from 1952 to 1969, and some later ones which did not have a Leader of Opporition as an example. Citing examples before 1997 when Parliament exercised its right to institute healthy parliamentary practices is to disrespect Parliament's wisdom. Also being cited is a so-called “10% rule”. Though the expression “10%” has some odious associations, particularly in reference to a neighbouring country, let us explore how it has been attempted to be made a gold standard of parliamentary behaviour and practice. It first made its appearance in the form of Directions of the Speaker of the Lower House of the Central Legislative Assembly in the pre-Independence era when political parties were fewer. Associations of legislators who sought to form a Parliamentary Party had to satisfy three conditions: (a) have a distinct ideology and programme of work; (b) have an organisation both inside and outside the House which was in touch with public opinion; and (c) command a strength that is equivalent to the quorum fixed to constitute a sitting of the House. This numerical eligibility started at 30 before Independence and stands at 54 now, with the expanding size of the Lok Sabha. According to two writers on parliamentary practice and procedure, M. N. Kaul and Shyam Lal Shakder, after the Janata Dal case during the tenth Lok Sabha where defections led to the disintegration of existing parliamentary parties and the formation of new combinations, it was agreed by consensus that the ultimate authority to determine whether an association of MPs belonged to a political party or not lay with the Election Commission of India. Directions 120 and 121 have fallen into disuse thereafter. Resurrecting them now serves no noble or practical purpose. The test of who constitutes the single largest party in opposition must be applied through the Tenth Schedule inserted into the Constitution in 1985. In order to crack down on legislators' unethical party-hopping in pursuit of power and pelf, Parliament clarified the relationship between an 'original political party' and its representative in either House of Parliament, namely, the 'legislature party'. The Tenth Schedule makes it clear that a legislature party is a subset of its parent political party outside Parliament, irrespective of the number of seats it may garner after the elections. In 1998, a law was enacted to provide official facilities to the chief whips and deputy whips of parties represented in Parliament. A legislature party with at least 55 MPs in the Lok Sabha would be recognised as a Parliamentary Party and others with between 30-54 MPs would be called Parliamentary Groups. The purpose of this law is plain, simple and limited: to provide a room for the MPs to meet, a telephone to use for official work and a stenographer to provide secretarial assistance. The only reference to the Leader of Opposition in this law is aimed at preventing an MP who is also the Leader of Opposition from getting such facilities as they already have. These criteria also govern seating arrangements in both Houses. Applying these criteria to who should or should not be the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha is misinformed at best and mischievous at worst. The Tenth Schedule is crystal clear about the relationship between political parties outside Parliament and their legislature parties within. It is the reading of the Tenth Schedule with the 1977 law that should determine who can, and should, be the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha. Other laws, rules or directions simply have no bearing on this issue. Of course, the appropriate authority to make this decision is the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. Jagdeep S. Chhokar is a former Professor of IIM, Ahmedabad, and Venkatesh Nayak is with the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. The views expressed are personal |
||||||
Golfing Burra Sahibs in bunker Using the big 'broom putter' on such green-loving public servants is really a ‘bogey’ shot. And especially so, when during the poll blitzkrieg of Narendra Modi, among the other catchy PR pictures unleashed of the half-sleeve kurta-clad man of action, there was also one of him attired in a swashbuckling golfing hat, dapper goggles and complete other golfing paraphernalia having a swing at the noble game. And how far the ball travelled the nation knows! Consider the golf ball to be a ‘sarkari’ file, and you will appreciate the wisdom of golf perfectly applicable to the efficient discharge of public duties. Lesson one for all golfers is ‘heads down’, followed by ‘keep your eye on the ball (file)’ and then ‘follow through’! How close to the mantra for mandarins of the ‘mantralayas’. At the beginning of a round the golfer tees off with all his swagger, hitting hard for the ball to travel far. But it has a divine will of its own, and a sudden gust of wind, an unexpected undulation or the chirping of a koel is just enough to send it into the rough. But the good golfer, like the seasoned civil servant, knows how to get it out. You can use either a long iron — and if no one is watching-just shift the 'lie' a wee bit. Better still, hire a smart caddie who knows what exactly the boss wants. As a member of a government-run golf club, I have a first-hand account of the great dedication of the civil servants in discharging their onerous duties, at the fairways. One police top boss's arrival is heralded by a posse of cops descending on the course before the worthy arrives. And just before he takes stance for the swing, a smart salute by a huffing and puffing ‘thanedar’ catches up with him as ‘Janab’ has to sign some urgent files. At times there is a General Sahib also at play. The clash of titans unleashes a major turf war. The vast army of orderlies, caddies and over-zealous minions run 5 miles ahead, shepherding all other golfers to make way for the Sahibs sauntering in. Let's not grudge our Burra Sahibs a bit of swinging on duty. And may the steel frame not bend before such big brother tactics. No need to hide the clubs beneath the bed or the office desk. |
||||||
Minorities should be Modi’s major concern
The public disgust with Congress (UPA) government of the last decade has seen it being defeated — no being decimated. But the Bharatiya Janata Party must not over exult by assuming that the majority has endorsed its policies. It should be politically honest enough to admit that it is the corporate-created TV, sms, publicity image of Modi that has scored. A delusional image of development being unleashed by Modi has somehow temporarily sanitised the young into the Modi club. The BJP's electoral expense of Rs 20,000 to 40,000 crore is considered a modest estimate. This strengthens the demand for prohibition of corporate funding in elections. Modi is obviously a deeply religious man as is shown by his doing puja of the Ganga. No one can take any exception to his personal belief and action. But Modi is now the Prime Minister of this country, where 20 per cent are non-Hindu Minority, out of which 80 per cent (nearly 18 crore) are Muslims. Modi has been proclaiming that he intends to function evenly and without any discrimination either in favour of Hindus or against Muslims and other minorities. Could Modi in this hour of his triumph clear the fear amongst Muslims? He could, to begin with, pay a visit to the Dargah of Khwaja Chishti in Ajmer and offer a chaddar. This revered place has been, for centuries, a sanctuary of repose for men and women of all faiths as an assertion that all religions are on an equal pedestal. As far as the Modi development model is concerned, there is going to be deep conflict between the neo-liberal strategy of development and of decentralised development as envisaged by 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendments of our Constitution. On this matter, the peoples immediate resistance would be on the UPA-sponsored Japanese-financed Amritsar-Calcutta and Delhi- Bombay corridors’ development plan. This is going to displace millions of small landholders and poor (this Modi is likely to follow up because this fits in with his development pattern). So this is a continuing danger — one which the Socialist Party and other human right activists will collide with — this conflict is acceptable and is natural in any democratic nation. The biggest challenge faced by Modi is how to act in a manner so as to avoid divisive conflict in society. This is dependent on how he acts towards the minorities, especially the Muslims. This is because under our Constitution no religion can claim superiority of status against any other religion. All religions under our Constitution have equal acceptance and status. It is a truism that in any country the faith and the confidence of the minorities in the impartial and even functioning of the state is the acid test of being a civilised state. This is accepted wisdom was expressed succinctly by Lord Acton; “A state which is incompetent to satisfy different races condemns itself; a state which labours to neutralise, to absorb or to expel them is destitute of the chief basis of self-government”. We need only substitute ‘minorities’ for ‘races’ in the above quotation to apply the test in India. Thus, inclusive development in India and for that matter in any country alone is the path to prosperity. It is an undeniable truth and needs to be irrevocably accepted by all in India, namely that minorities, Muslims and Christians are not outsiders. They are an integral part of India. This was emphasised by Swami Vivekanand, (whom Modi will certainly accept as one of the greatest Indians we have produced) thus; “He also told Hindus not to talk of the superiority of one religion over another. Even toleration of other faiths was not right; it smacked of blasphemy”. In his letter to a Muslim friend in 1898, he again emphasised. “For our own motherland a junction of the two great systems Hinduism and Islam — Vedanta brain and Islam body — is the only hope……. the future perfect India.” Modi often purports to show his neutrality by proclaiming that he does not recognise any special rights for minorities — he treats all people as Gujaratis or Indians. This apparently impartial approach for all is similar to the taunt by French Author Anatole France— who ironically commented at the neglect of the poor by French state thus; “Law in its majesty gives equal rights to the rich and poor to sleep under the bridges”. Thus to say that minorities who are admittedly far behind in the race of development as against the others should not be given special treatment is not only sheer injustice but violative of the mandate of a report by the UN Human Right Council, Forum on Minority, issued on December 14, 15, 2010: “Consequently, the right of minorities to participate effectively in economic life must be fully taken into account by governments seeking to promote equality at every level. Governments should gather and regularly publicise disaggregated data to measure and monitor the effective participation of minorities in economic life.” It is mischievous propaganda that targets the programme for minorities by calling it neither legal nor Constitutional. Modi rightly reveres Gandhiji and would surely remember what he said in 1921 and March 1947, namely; “I would say that Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of mother India — just as the trouble in one eye affects the other too, similarly the whole of India suffers when either Hindus or Muslims suffer.” Would not Modi like to pay obeisance to the memory of Gandhiji by declaring that Government of India's 15-Point Minority Programme which has continued under different governments will continue as before and that he is open to a meeting with minority leaders to make it even more effective. This declaration, if made, will act as a balm and relieve the tension in the country especially amongst Muslims, thus enabling Modi to attend to other urgent problems. Modi’s victory has given him an unparalleled position amongst his colleagues. This situation poses a danger to democracy as pointed out by Dr. Ambedkar thus; “There is nothing wrong in being grateful to great men who have rendered life-long service to the country. But there are limits to gratefulness. For in India, unlike in any other country in the world, Bhakti in religion may be a road to the salvation of the soul. But, in politics, Bhakti or hero-worship is a sure road to degradation and to eventual dictatorship”. We must never forget this warning by the architect of our Constitution. The writer, a former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, chaired the Sachar Committee, which was constituted by the Government of India to report on the status of Muslims in India.
Points to ponder |
|
Perpetuating stereotypes General Ata Hasnain, who implemented the acclaimed “Hearts Doctrine” during his term as General Officer Commanding in Kashmir, authored a disappointing article in The Tribune recently, titled “Don't Miss the Bus: Why Indian Muslims Must Support Prime Minister Modi.” The focus of his argument on Indian Muslims as the primary opposition to Modi is fallacious to begin with. Elected with a 31 per cent vote, it is likely that Modi became PM despite an equal number of people (if not more) voting against him; people that include not just most of the Muslim population but large numbers of secular Hindus and other minorities as well. It is astounding that an article that attempts to reach out to a community's fear of Modi does so by lecturing them on their lack of nationalism and their “narrow prism of ideology and faith,” rather than addressing substantive concerns. By engaging in lazy analysis, perpetuating dangerous stereotypes against India's Muslim population, dismissing their democratic right to dissent and ignoring the real reason behind opposition to Modi, General Hasnain does both himself and India's Muslim community a great disservice. The General's primary argument seems to be to appeal to the Muslim community's Indian nationalism, while reminding them of the pathetic state of affairs in Pakistan. The argument that Indian Muslims must support Modi as a show of their gratitude for living in democratic India and not being labelled Al-Qaida terrorists is not just facile, it is reprehensible. Yes, Muslims enjoy the fruits of Indian democracy and for that India should be grateful to Muslims for adding to its colourful democracy, not the other way around. Many Muslims, such as Maulana Azad and Abdul Kalam to name just two, have been instrumental in institutionalising a democratic ethos in India. We need to remember that democracy is a gift that Indian society gave to itself; not a gift that Indian society gave to Muslims. When did we sink to a level that we applaud ourselves for not labelling Indian Muslims as Al-Qaida members? (The assertion that we don't is also false; one only needs to look at statements made by BJP/RSS leaders like Giriraj Singh). By what twisted logic does India's relatively less-bigoted treatment of Muslims (compared to some other countries) entail compulsory support for Modi?It seems as if the General is calling out: “Muslims of India, You must support Modi because unlike some Americans, Mr Modi and India does not label you a terrorist! You must be eternally grateful to Mr Modi for this magnanimity and support his Prime Ministership”. If Muslims should support Modi in return for not being labelled terrorists, perhaps Ata Hasnain will remind the Christians that,unlike in CAR, they aren't being slaughtered in India, and therefore they too should support Modi. The logic behind such sentiment is beyond preposterous. General Hasnain tries to invoke a strange and perverted brand of nationalism that is now in vogue in a ‘Modi-fied’ atmosphere; a brand of nationalism which Modi has a monopoly over. All those who oppose him are therefore “anti-nationals.” This is the Hindutva brand of nationalism which is being normalised — where Muslims are anti-nationals for not accepting the “Hindu way of life” and in this specific case, being reminded of their nationalistic duty for not eulogising the latest flag bearer of Hindu nationalism. India must remember that one of the fundamentals of democracy is not just about the acceptance of a verdict, but also the acceptance of those who express dissatisfaction with the verdict. The right approach to a minority's fears about a democratic verdict is not to dismiss them, but to respond to and address their legitimate concerns. The reverse is majoritarianism, not democracy. The good General asks, “Why should they be thunderstruck by a simple change of government?”General Hasnain should have considered reflecting on his own question for a while. Perhaps it is because Modi champions an ideology that always has been and still is rabidly anti-Muslim. Perhaps it is because Modi venerates a militant outfit that is responsible for violence that has targeted Muslims for decades now. Perhaps it is because the RSS's visibility in national discourse has accelerated like never before. Perhaps it is because Modi allowed the brazen misuse of the Disturbed Areas Act that resulted in the ghettoisation of Muslim communities in Gujarat. Perhaps it is because he dismisses wearing a skull cap as mere tokenism, but doesn't consider wearing Sikh turbans and ten other tribal hats of all shapes and forms as tokenism. Perhaps it is because he dismisses hate speeches made by his candidates as “petty” remarks. Perhaps it is because he nominated riot-accused Sanjeev Baliyan as a Cabinet Minister in a moment of Kodnani déjà vu. Or perhaps, just perhaps, it is because Modi was allegedly responsible for the mass murder of over a thousand Muslims in riots that the higher judiciary is investigating and remains mired in deep controversy. Many of his arguments suffer from selective amnesia. He reminds Muslims of the many Presidents, Vice-Presidents and Service Chiefs that Muslims have given to the nation. Is this a man who will appoint Muslims to the post of President, Vice President and Service Chief? Post-poll, almost all international publications expressed grave caution while reporting Modi's electoral victory. — The writer has recently graduated student from the University of Toronto with a Masters in Global Affairs |
|
| 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 | |
T
T