|
|
|
|
|
Avoidable political bickering Dissection cut out |
|
|
Modi's baptism by fire
When I was named for a beauty prize
Juvenile justice at crossroads
|
Avoidable political bickering The
Congress-BJP standoff in Parliament may further delay reforms. When in opposition, the BJP had resisted legislative measures, including the insurance Bill, it is pushing now. The Congress, contrary to its commitment of constructive support, is blocking Bills which it would have passed had it been in power. The BJP is getting a taste of its own medicine. Disruptive politics has minimised chances of a consensus on growth-propelling measures and reforms like the goods and services tax. The crucial problems of controlling price rise and accelerating growth remain largely unattended. There is a broader political agreement over FDI in insurance. The raising of the 26 per cent cap to 49 per cent makes no real difference since control of companies will stay in Indian hands. The BJP government is in a tearing hurry to pass the insurance Bill before Prime Minister Modi's US visit next month, while the Congress insists on it being referred to a select committee and this is seen as a dilatory tactic. On Wednesday the Cabinet cleared the proposals for FDI in the Railways and defence. The last railway budget laid out the road map for expansion. Foreign investment is to play a key role in the development of railway infrastructure. Private investment, domestic as well as foreign, would not materialise unless returns are made attractive. For this fares would have to be hiked - a politically sensitive area and a challenge for reformers. Conditions for FDI in defence are even more investor unfriendly. All proposals above 26 per cent have to be cleared by the Foreign Investment Promotion Board on a case-to-case basis. As in the case of multi-brand retail, the opening up of insurance, railway and defence may well remain a non-starter. Foreign investors are not very keen on India because of several issues, including the unease of doing business here, uncertainties over retroactive tax, inadequate infrastructure, policy bottlenecks, inspector raj, delay in project clearances and difficulties in land acquisition. Just as India has its own reasons for being cautious, foreign investors are guided by their own self-interest, which in the long run is to make and repatriate profits.
|
|
Dissection cut out The UGC has banned the dissection of animals for educational purposes in all courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The announcement followed a meeting of People for Ethical Treatment of Animals
(PETA) representatives and Maneka Gandhi with UGC officials. This gave the impression the decision had come under pressure from the Union Minister, often accused of going overboard in animal rights advocacy. However, she currently holds the portfolio of Women and Child Development and has no direct control over either HRD or environment matters. Also, the UGC had in 2010 decided to ban dissection at the undergraduate level, following a recommendation by its own experts' committee. There are essentially two reasons against allowing the dissection of animals in educational laboratories for learning basic anatomy. One is ethical. By some estimates, close to two million animals lose their lives for this purpose, the benefits of which are questionable. At times these animals are killed in painful ways, or even opened up without killing. The other reason is protection of wildlife, or conservation of biodiversity. While rats are not covered by the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, nearly all other non-domestic animals, including frogs, are. Agencies supplying animals to labs farm out the procurement to animal catchers who often poach protected species illegally. Dissection thus also ends up supporting the poaching industry. As for the requirements of learning science, the UGC has recommended the use of modern techniques such as models, computer-based simulators and virtual labs to teach students animal anatomy, which are also cheaper in the long run. Dissection is done in US educational labs too, but the syllabi do not compel students to practise it. Often educational institutes in India get into trouble with the law for retaining animal samples for want of awareness regarding the wildlife Act, which prohibits the holding of even parts of any animal categorised under wildlife. NGOs as well as the government need to make a concerted effort to create awareness on this. Education, meanwhile, has to move on from the ways of the early 20th century.
|
|||||
|
It is not how much we have, but how much we enjoy, that makes happiness. —Charles Spurgeon, a British Baptist preacher
|
|||||
Indians and the war SIR S. Subramania Iyer, K.C.I.E., suggests in a letter to the "Madras Mail" that all classes of citizens in the Southern Presidency should at once come forward to declare their participation in the outburst of spontaneous loyalty in every part of India. In offering this suggestion he observes that at this critical juncture "such a chorus of devotion and allegiance to the Throne proceeding from millions of His Majesty's Indian subjects cannot but have a very reassuring effect in Europe and remove any possible doubt about our unflinching devotion to our Sovereign." He also asks Indians to consider how much they stand to gain by upholding the integrity of the Empire and by following the sincere example set by Irish Nationalists, Ulsterites and even militant suffragettes. It thus appears that while Calcutta holds a Town Hall meeting to concert measures to assist Government in the present crisis and suggests the formation of a Volunteer Corps, Madras is satisfied with a more modest and less ambitious scheme of a great demonstration of loyalty. Bombay, we note, has followed the lead of Calcutta in a modified form.
India's offers of help A MESSAGE has been received by the Viceroy from the Prime Minister of Nepal to the effect that the military resources of Nepal will be placed at the disposal of His Imperial Majesty in the event of war. In addition to the Ruling Princes who have offered assistance, Their Highness the Maharaja of Kashmir, Maharaja of Jodhpur, the Maharaja of Mysore, the Maharaja of Bhavnagar and the Maharaja Regent and Nawab of Palanpur have unreservedly placed the whole resources of their States at the disposal of His Majesty the King Emperor.
|
Modi's baptism by fire It is, in a sense, payback time for the Congress — to the disregard of national interest. But it highlights a flaw in Mr Modi’s initial projection of how he intends to rule. It was narrow-minded of the new government not to give the Congress speedily the titular office of the Leader of the Opposition, despite it falling short of numbers. It is the general belief that had Mr Modi wanted it, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha would have immediately favoured the Congress. Second, the case against Ms Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul in the National Herald case, characterised by the Congress as vendetta is being widely interpreted as an effort to strike another blow at a party that has led India for some hundred years and more. This view prevails irrespective of the merits of the case. At least an important section of the Bharatiya Janata Party seems to be determined to decimate the Congress, apart from replacing its credo of secularism with its own definition of a Hindutva-oriented society. Despite the appalling show of the grand old party in the general election and its problems of effective leadership, in immediate terms, Mr Modi is making his task of governance harder. As is well known, the BJP does not enjoy a majority in the Rajya Sabha and the expedient of a joint session to pass vital legislation is open, but is a cumbersome procedure that would represent a failure of legislative governance. The Congress has a mountain of a task to climb out of the abyss it has fallen into, but by signalling an obstructive policy in the face of what it interprets as the BJP's antagonism, it is complicating the government's agenda. The BJP, of course, faces its own problems. Whatever Mr Modi's own views and inclinations, he has his baggage of the Sangh Parivar to carry. This leads not merely to the daily embarrassment of the BJP members voicing their nativist and retrograde views but the government's compulsion of sacrificing higher education and research at the altar of an archaic set of rules made up of myth and religiosity has its costs. How far our higher education structure will be skewed in favour of superstition, rather than knowledge, remains to be seen. The contretemps over the insurance Bill is a warning that the government cannot subscribe to its programme of demolishing the Congress and expect smooth passage of key reform Bills. What incentive is there for the Congress to cooperate in these circumstances? Perhaps it is part of the harsh learning process for a former Chief Minister who could rule his state of Gujarat largely untroubled by opposition. But one hopes that some of his colleagues with experience of functioning at the national level will have the audacity to warn the new Prime Minister of the different ball game he faces. In real terms, it boils down to a reordering of priorities dependent upon Mr Modi's ability to temper the programmes of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Thus far he has sought to propitiate his mentor by giving the Indian Council of Historical Research to an RSS sympathiser and the education and allied ministries to a novice. On the other hand, the RSS is demanding far more, with the risk that its extravagant agenda will impinge upon the new government's capacity to initiate key reforms. The Congress is, of course, licking its wounds, but it retains the capacity to obstruct the government's agenda. The national picture is far more complicated than what prevails in a state. The ruling party cannot climb a high horse and expect others to follow. The next weeks and months will determine the speed with which Mr Modi learns his lessons. The only previous BJP leader to govern the country was a very different kind of leader. Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee was a consensual figure widely respected for his catholic outlook. He was thus able to round the rough edges of the RSS, periodically proclaiming his allegiance to it while disregarding its edicts. On the other hand, Mr Modi won his election precisely because of his determination and capacity to take quick decisions in furtherance of good development and administration. The large aspirational class grew tired of Congress dilatoriness and crowned a man with a reputation as a doer. Mr Modi is thus facing the ultimate test of his career. If he cannot master the art of national governance, he would come to grief. Ironically, most of his problems arise from within his own party. He has not merely to tame the zeal of his wild men and women but also carve out space for sane governance from the unbelievable melange of dotty beliefs the Sangh Parivar subscribes to. How he squares the circle is his challenge. Given the short time the BJP has been in power, one cannot pronounce a definitive judgement on the prospects for the future. One piece of advice Mr Modi should heed is to postpone his desire to decimate the Congress. He will need the tolerance, if not the good offices, of the Congress to take his economic reforms forward.
|
|||||||
When I was named for a beauty prize In Hindu Sabha College there was a student's City Club, of which one Professor Mathur was the patron. The late Mr K.L. Bhatia was the Principal. He had a dominating personality and was a strict disciplinarian. The club premises were situated on the Mall Road, where functions were used to be organised on important religious and other occasions. Students of elite urban families used to be in the forefront in patronising such events. Professor Mathur was a lively gentleman who had endeared himself to the students and his colleagues by his genial temperament and poetic ambience. While teaching in the class he would regale the students with chaste Urdu Poetry. I was then a first-year student and had just left the Hindu Sabha High School. Belonging to a nearby village and a middle-class family, I was unaware of the niceties of city life. Clad in a khadar shirt and pyjama, I would walk four miles to attend the classes. The student union decided to celebrate 'Lohri'. About a hundred students and teachers attended the function. Students danced around the Lohri fire and sang Punjabi folk songs, which enthralled the gathering. Some young as well as old teachers also started dancing to the beat of the drum. After the prizes were given to the participants, Professor Mathur announced that they were now to select a participant to whom a 'Beauty Prize' would be given. Everybody became anxious to know the lucky winner. I was sitting away from the main group clad in a simple village dress. Little I did know that I would be chosen for the prize because, as it was, I hardly deserved it and that too in the presence of very handsome, good-looking boys of the city. When my name was announced for the 'Beauty Prize', I thought this was a mischief played by some city students to make fun of a simple village student. The announcement, in fact, led to peals of laughter. Reaching home, I described the incident to my father, a practising lawyer. I told him that I would not again go to that college since I had become a laughing stock for my classmates. A legal notice was served on the Principal for hurting my sentiments and lowering my dignity in the estimation of the fellow college students and others. Prompt came the reply expressing regret at the happening. The impact on me was so strong that for several days I did not attend the classes despite the entreaties of my father. Much water has flowed under the bridges since then. I have held seniors posts in the government, including Additional Advocate General in Himachal, but the memory of having been chosen for the 'Beauty Prize' is still fresh in my mind.
|
|||||||
Juvenile justice at crossroads
When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.” While reading the draft of the new Act for Juveniles, I am left wondering, a bit, like Alice. The Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 is being repealed and replaced by a new act drafted by the Ministry of Women and Child Development. The draft act was put up on the Ministry website on June 18 for 15 days, for inviting comments. It was been sent to the Law Ministry and now the Cabinet has cleared the changes. The Minister of Women and Child Development, Maneka Gandhi was reported to have said that, according to the police, 50 per cent of sexual crimes are committed by 16-year-olds who know the Juvenile Justice Act, so they can do it. Hence the need to change the law and treat them as adults. Having encountered more juveniles shown as adults in prisons, one knows how subjugated the young and poor can be and mere police statements need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Public policy panic The issue of juveniles and crime, certainly seems to be surrounded by misinformation and hyperbole. Public discourse on juvenile crime has to be viewed within the backdrop of concerns over “public safety” and “security,” that arose especially after the Nirbhaya case in December, 2012. The alarmist cry and panic today, is almost akin to public policy panic created in the United States in the 1990s with cry for “adult time for adult crime.” Perceptions of 16-18 years as hardcore offenders have been much highlighted in the media. Media coverage, whether through newspapers or television, provides a highly skewed picture of the crime and the legal system. The argument for tougher laws is that serious crime is going unpunished, with the offender wearing the garb of juvenility. Are all juveniles such clever persons, or are they devils or monsters, to be feared and indefinitely locked up? While the “criminalisation of adolescence” and an overall turn to more authoritarian measures to “fighting crime” has not worked in other countries, it is this system we are trying to adopt. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has also examined the issues related to changes in the Juvenile Justice Act, and petitions challenging some of its provisions in Salil Bali vs. Union of India & Subramaniam Swami vs. Union of India. The Supreme Court found no justification for any changes in Law, the JJ Act 2000 (as amended in 2006 & 2011). Except the artificially created media myth, the Hon’ble Supreme of India, from all angles, found no valid reasons to make the changes in the law, that is, either to reduce the age to 16 years or less for juveniles or to tinker with the Juvenile Justice System, as demanded by some. To be effective, any legal response to juvenile offending should be grounded in scientific knowledge about adolescent development. Instead of a progressive view, we seem to be turning more retributive and seeking more deterrence than reformation and reintegration. Background of juvenile delinquency The concept of juvenile delinquency and juvenile justice have undergone a process of constant evolution and development over the years. The history can be traced to The Apprentice Act of 1850. Section 82, of the Indian Penal Code 1860, sets age limits on criminal responsibility and excludes children younger than seven years from culpability. Children between 7 and 12 years old are considered to have sufficient maturity to understand the nature of their actions only under certain circumstances. The Reformatory Schools Act, 1897, reflected the change from purely punitive to a reformatory approach towards juveniles. Code of Criminal Procedure (Sec 360) provides for release on Probation, of persons below 21 years, who are convicted with fine or imprisonment below seven years. Then, the Children’s Act of 1960 had a reformatory thrust. It was in 1986 that the Central Government passed a comprehensive act, the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986. (JJA). The most important international instruments for the administration of juvenile justice are the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which came into effect in September 1990 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights or the ICCPR. The CRC was ratified by India in 1992. Apart from these international treaties, there are four main supporting juvenile justice instruments: United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Guidelines); United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Adminstration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules); United Nation Rules for Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty (Havana Rules); and the Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal-Justice System (Vienna Guidelines). These four instruments are the accepted minimum standards to which states should adhere to when setting up or amending their existing juvenile justice system. The CRC Article 37(a), clearly forbids torture, capital punishment and life imprisonment without the possibility of release, for all persons under 18 years old. It also calls for limited use of detention and only as a measure of last resort – when all other alternative solutions do not seem possible or adequate. Following these international developments, the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act was enacted in 2000. ) It defines a child as below 18 years. The basic aim of the Act was to adopt a child-friendly approach in the settlement and dispostion of matter in the best interest of the children and arrange for their rehabilitation through established institutions. Ironically, this legislation to protect children failed due to its tardy implementation. Now we seek to revert to the 1986 act. Reform process Reforms is a long-term proposition that is often fragile. The financial as also the human resource implications of reform should be contained in the policy paper that represents the start of the reform process. It will prove virtually impossible to implement any new law if it has not been costed and resources allocated. This is so apparent in the implementation of the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000. More than a decade later, every district did not have Juvenile Justice Boards, Child Welfare Committees, or separate rooms for adjudication, which actually depend upon available financial resources. Despite the alarmist cry, the share of IPC crimes committed by juveniles to total IPC crimes reported in the country has remained static in a decade (around 1 per cent till 2005), and then has marginally increased to 1.2 per cent in 2012 and 2013. Out of the total 43,506 juveniles apprehended during 2013, 38765 juveniles (89.1 per cent) were apprehended under IPC crimes while 4,741 for committing SLL Crimes. The highest number of juveniles were apprehended for theft (7,969), followed by hurt and burglary. Theft and burglary are crimes more driven by poverty. However, the highest increase in crime head has been in terms of crimes against women. Numbers arrested are around 4 per cent for total rape cases in India. But every rape case need not be a case of a serious sex offender. I have also seen a few 18 and above also inside prisons, on account of relationships gone wrong. Out of the total 4,741 juveniles apprehended under SLL Crimes in the country during 2013, the highest number of juveniles were apprehended under the Gambling Act (756), followed by the Prohibition Act and the Excise Act. Around 50 per cent of all juveniles were illiterate or primary pass, and had an annual family income less than Rs 25,000. (Source: Crime in India 2013, National Crime Records Bureau) The development of delinquent and criminal behaviour among adolescents as they make a transition to adulthood is a complex issue. There are varied development trajectories, and adolescence is a period of complex physiological, psychological and social changes. While children between 16 and 18 years know what is right or wrong, research indicates they lack control. Stimulating and risk-taking behaviour is something that some indulge in. Hence experimenting with drugs, sexual relationships may be there. Much of adolescent involvement in illegal activity is an extension of risk-taking and prevalent peer pressure. Most adolescents mature out of these activities. While we consider the 16-year- olds of today as grown-up and mature, the intellectual ability is different from emotional and social maturity. The likelihood of offending are also strongly affected by youths’ interactions with their environment, which includes parents, peers, schools, and communities. Where do we draw the age line for juveniles? It is 16 today, maybe 14 or 12 years in another few years. Any new law related to the juvenile justice system should be preceded by a comprehensive policy paper setting out the reasons for reform and the outcomes that the new law intends to achieve. The present bill fails on this account. There are some provisions in the Draft bill that are a cause of concern. While certainly there should be no blanket immunity due to age, Section 14 (1) and (2), together with Sec 17 (3) of the bill, deals with serious offences (murder, rape, sexual assault, robbery, dacoity, etc.) committed by 16-18 years old, to be tried along with adults in regular courts, by requiring the J.J Board to inquire into the premediated nature, mitigating circumstances, culpability and understanding the consequences of the act, then can transfer to a Children’s court, (which will have to be set up in many districts). The inquiry into these factors being completed in a month. An inquiry before a child is actually tried. No guidance has been provided about these tests. The system — known as the waiver system, comes with its own set of problems. In the USA, there are three types of waivers, and a lot of children get pushed into the adult system. It may create more confusion than offer solutions to crime prevention. The system of blended sentencing — where the juvenile court can impose juvenile and adult sanctions has not been incorporated. Juveniles sentenced in the adult system are limited in their ability to obtain employment, and other life opportunities. International good practices Innovative good practices around the world, like the restorative-justice model, in the form of victim-offender mediation, peace-making circles, youth conference and making reparation or restoration for any damage caused have not been considered in the new draft. Diversion of children immediately after the first contact and up to the first hearing have also worked effectively. Members of the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), the District Magistrate (DM) or the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) or (Civil Surgeon) of the district have multifarious functions, and cannot spare time to function as the Chairperson or a Member of Committee (CWC). Full-time members as under the JJ Act 2000 are required. There is no uniform law in India for adoptions. However, concerns have been expressed at the time period for declaring the child free for adoption under this Bill. As adoption is a finality, many children who are lost or missing, may not be able to reunite with their parents. Further, how can a JJ Board preside over a civil matter like adoption? It would lead to endless litigation. Another provision on imprisonment for corporal punishment may witness contentious cases. In particular, there should be an independent inspection service. An Inspection Committee under the JJ Act 2000 was empowered to conduct inspections on a regular basis. Asking the JJ Board or the CWC to do this is contrary to independent inspections. Regular evaluations of the juvenile justice system, particularly the effectiveness of measures taken, need to be undertaken. A juvenile justice system should fit the offenders’ needs and societal requirements. Focus is not just to establish guilt but also to aim at accountability and rehabilitation. Early-intervention programmes, which promote early education, poverty reduction, skills-and-job development and involve families and communities should be used to tackle juvenile delinquency in innovative ways. Some amendments in the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 would have served the purpose. To be effective, reform should ideally be a participatory process. It should take into account not just political ideology but also the views of professionals working within the system, as well as those of the children who find themselves at the receiving end of the juvenile justice system. Unfortunately, the views of such children do not seem to have been taken while drafting this bill. “The more you treat people as criminals at younger and younger ages, the more damage you’re likely to do to their psyche.” Treading a fine line
— The writer is Deputy Director, Institute of Correctional Administration, Chandigarh
|
|
| 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
