Unsteady coalition plods on

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government is tottering with the loss of two large coalition partners in a span of six months but plods on, confident in the feeling that it will not be overthrown as few parties want to face elections immediately.

The Trinamool Congress, the Congress party’s largest ally, walked out of the coalition last September protesting against the decisions to open the retail sector to foreign direct investment and limit the subsidy on liquefied petroleum gas. The exit of its 19 members reduced the UPA to a minority with only 254 members in the 544-strong Lok Sabha. However, there was no threat to the government as it was supported from outside by the Samajwadi Party and the Bahujan Samaj Party which have 22 and 21 members respectively.

Last week the next biggest constituent, the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, with 18 members, pulled out of the alliance protesting against the government’s failure to press for censure of Sri Lanka in the UN Human Rights Council for violation of the rights of the island’s Tamil minority.

This further reduced the coalition’s strength in parliament, but the continued support of the SP and the BSP gives it the necessary numbers to claim a majority in the house. However, it is at the mercy of the SP and the BSP, either of which can bring it down at any time.

The SP’s Mulayam Singh Yadav and the BSP’s Mayawati are both ambitious leaders capable of driving hard bargains. Arch rivals in Uttar Pradesh politics, circumstances have forced them into the same side at the Centre.

The DMK had remained in the coalition without demur during the closing stages of the civil war in Sri Lanka when atrocities against the Tamils took place. Few, therefore, believe that its decision to withdraw support to the UPA and pull out its five ministers was dictated by sympathy for Sri Lankan Tamils.

DMK chief M Karunanidhi had been sulking since his daughter Kanimozhi, MP, and party colleague and former Communication Minister A Raja were arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation in 2011 on corruption charges. He chose to quit the coalition on the Sri Lankan human rights violations since it is an emotive issue in Tamil Nadu.

As soon as Karunanidhi announced his intention to leave the UPA, the Congress rushed three senor ministers, AK Antony, P Chidambaram and Ghulam Nabi Azad, to Chennai to mollify him. This was not easy since the government is keen to avoid doing anything which will push the Sri Lankan administration closer to China.

Yet, in a bid to placate him, the Congress leadership explored, against its own best judgement, the possibility of pushing through Parliament a resolution critical of Sri Lankan human rights violations. The move did not find favour with the Bharatiya Janata Party, the main opposition, and other parties like the SP and the Trinamool Congress. The aborted effort revealed a North-South divide in the country on the Sri Lankan issue.

The Congress, which has 203 members in the Lok Sabha, is now left with no ally with two-digit strength in the house, its largest remaining partners being Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar’s National Congress Party (nine members), Civil Aviation Minister Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok Dal (five) and Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (three).

Mayawati lost control of UP, the largest state, which sends 80 members to the Lok Sabha, in last year’s Assembly elections. She will not precipitate a situation which will lead to immediate parliamentary elections as it is unlikely to improve her party’s position.

Mulayam Singh Yadav may be thinking differently. The SP won the Assembly elections in the state and he has installed his son, Akhilesh Yadav, as the chief minister. He will not hesitate to pull the rug from under the UPA’s feet if he thinks the time is ripe for a kill. He knows that if he waits too long the ground situation may change to his disadvantage.

Facing increasing isolation as the elections approach, the Congress has begun a search for new allies. One party whose name figures in the speculation in this connection is the Janata Dal (United), the BJP’s largest partner in the National Democratic Alliance. The party heads the government in Bihar, a state with 40 seats in the Lok Sabha. The price Chief Minister Nitish Kumar has set for the support to any government at the Centre is a special package for his economically backward state.

A realignment of forces ahead of the elections is a possibility. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, March 26, 2013

A diplomatic mess

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The case of the two Italian marines who shot and killed two Indian fishermen at sea, off the Kerala coast, a year ago has spilled out of the courtroom, creating a diplomatic mess.

The marines were on anti-piracy duty aboard the Italian tanker MV Enrico Lexie which was going from Singapore to Egypt. According to the Italians, they opened fire in self-defence, mistaking the men in the fishing boat, Saint Antony, for pirates. Apparently they did not exercise due caution. The fishermen were unarmed. Somali-based pirates operate in the Arabian Sea but they are not active near the Kerala coast.

The Italians claimed the incident occurred in international waters. However, the Kerala police, which registered a criminal case against the marines, said the vessel was in Indian waters or in the contiguous zone. The positions of the two craft were not fixed with the help of their logbooks or the global positioning system.

The offending vessel was under the Italian flag and the alleged killers were members of the Italian armed forces. When the Indian coast guard brought the ship to Kochi and the Kerala police took the marines into custody, the Italian consul general in Mumbai flew into the port city to safeguard the interests of the ship and the marines.

Overlooking the fact that a sovereign state was involved, the Indian government left the issue to Kerala, presumably to avoid the opposition dragging the name of Italian-born Sonia Gandhi, who is Congress president and chairperson of the ruling United Progressive Alliance, into the matter.

Kerala’s Congress-led government was facing a crucial Assembly by-election at the time. The regional and national media’s vigorous pursuit of the fishermen’s families’ cry for justice put pressure on it to adopt a tough line.

Under the UN Convention on the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS), domestic laws apply fully in the territorial waters, which extend up to 12 nautical miles from the coastline. In the contiguous zone which extends to 12 nautical miles beyond the territorial waters, local laws apply in respect of some subjects. In certain situations, the home state and flag state have concurrent jurisdiction.

The Indian government failed to apply its mind to the issue of jurisdiction. When the marines challenged the Kerala proceedings against them, the Supreme Court ruled that the state has no jurisdiction since the shooting occurred in the contiguous zone, and not in the territorial waters. It said the central government can prosecute the marines under the domestic law, subject to the provisions of Article 100 of UNCLOS, which enjoins upon all countries to cooperate in the repression of piracy.

While directing the Centre to set up a special court to try the marines, the Supreme Court said Italy could question India’s jurisdiction invoking the provisions of UNCLOS. Even if India and Italy were found to have concurrent jurisdiction, this directive would hold good, it added.

Within two months of the shooting, the fishermen’s families filed a petition in a local court seeking compensation from the Italian shipowners. With the help of the Catholic Church, which commands the allegiance of a large section of the fishing community, the Italians quickly worked out an out-of-court settlement and paid the two families Rs10 million each.

While insisting on the right to try the marines, India showed them special consideration. In Kerala, they were lodged in a police club or a guest house, not in a jail. In Delhi, they were allowed to stay in the Italian embassy.

Last December, the Kerala high court permitted them to go home to spend Christmas with their families. Last month the Supreme Court allowed them to go to Italy to vote in the elections.

On March 11, the Italian government informed the Indian government that the marines, who were due to return by March 22, would not come. With this, the Italian ambassador, who had given an undertaking in the court guaranteeing their return, fell foul of Indian law. However, it is not easy to punish him as he has diplomatic immunity.

Thirteen months after the shooting the special court to try the marines has still not come up. Given India’s court delays, a final verdict in the case may be a long way off.

When India had lawful custody of the marines, it studiously avoided the diplomatic route. By holding them back Italy is trying to force it to come to the diplomatic path. Both sides having taken false steps, things may well get worse before they can improve. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, March 19, 2013.

Neighbourhood challenges

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

China-watchers are speculating on the implications of Beijing’s involvement in infrastructure projects in Sri Lanka and the Maldives, two small countries where India has vital strategic interests. Foreign media accounts speak of a “string of pearls” from Pakistan to Myanmar, comprising Chinese-funded port development projects.

The largest of these is the Hambantota port in southern Sri Lanka, the first stage of which, built at a cost of $360 million, was opened to ships in 2010. When its second stage, for which China has provided $810 million, is completed, it will become the largest port in the region.

Conceived as a refuelling and service point for cargo vessels, Hambantota is expected to handle about 45,000 metric tonnes (MT) of ship fuel this year. In the next two years its handling capacity will go up to 125,000MT. China has also offered $500 million for the expansion of the Colombo port.

Since 2007 China has committed $6.4 billion for various projects in Sri Lanka. Out of this $3.6 billion has been disbursed. An international airport for which China lent $209 million is due to open next week. Chinese companies have secured at least 14 major infrastructure projects in the island without going through the tender process.

Already Sri Lanka’s biggest partner in trade and development, China is all set to assume an even bigger role in its economy. The country expects China to provide more than half of an estimated $21 billion needed for various projects in the next three years.

In the last decade China’s trade with the Maldives has grown from $3 million to $60 million. When the country terminated its airport agreement with the Indian company GMR there were insinuations that it was acting at China’s behest. Later, Maldivian Defence Minister Mohammed Nazim visited China, leading to speculation that President Mohammed Waheed, who seized power ousting elected president Mohamed Nasheed, plans to take relations with China beyond diplomatic and economic levels.

When the Maldives sought a soft loan from China for information technology and communications projects, India was concerned it may have implications for its own security.

The US Congressional Research Office, in a report two years ago, had said China was “building or wanting to build” naval bases along the sea lane linking it with Gulf oil sources. China, it added, was following a “places, not bases” strategy: it was building commercial ports, not military bases.

Around the same time the International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, quoted a retired Chinese naval officer as saying China might set up its first overseas base somewhere in the Middle East. However, the Defence Ministry denied any overseas base was planned.

The emergence of divergent voices from China may be indicative of differences of opinion within its powerful political establishment. Contrary to the conventional view of foreign experts, different views are known to be in contention within it.

Justifying China’s increased presence in the Indian Ocean, Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who is a brother of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, points out that it has a vital interest in the region as it imports 200MT of oil a year to sustain its industry-intensive economy. The Chinese-aided projects in the island are purely commercial, he says.

Sri Lanka receives investments from India, the US and Japan also but they cannot match cash-rich China’s soft loan terms. China provides assistance in the form of cash grants, interest-free loans and long-term concessionary loans on which the interest rate may be as low as two or three per cent.

Some domestic analysts disapprove of Sri Lanka’s excessive dependence on China. A former diplomat, Dayan Jayatilleka, reminds the administration that, unlike Pakistan, Sri Lanka has no land link with China, and it is highly improbable that China will bruise its relations with India over anything other than its own core interests. 

While the interests of India and China do not always coincide the two are sensitive to each other’s vital concerns. Attempts by China to understand India’s position in Afghanistan, which is at variance with that of its long-time ally Pakistan, is a case in point.

The most worrisome aspect of India’s relations with its small neighbours is not China’s growing economic links with them but its own diplomatic and political failures. It has not been able to persuade Sri Lanka to give its Tamil minority a fair deal or the Maldives to respect the rules of democracy. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, March 12, 2013.

Doublethink on women's security

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

In the two-and-a-half months since the Delhi gangrape of December 16, which shocked the nation, 65 rape cases have been reported from the national capital — an average of 26 in a month. This points to a fall in the incidence of rape as 568 cases — a monthly average of more than 47 — were reported in 2011, the last full year for which figures are available.

However, there is no room for complacency. Memories of the brutal gangrape are still fresh in people’s minds. A firm conclusion about its impact can only be drawn after watching the trend over a long period.

Meanwhile there are some disturbing signs. Many of the victims are minor girls. Last week a seven-year-old was assaulted in her school in New Delhi. Also, the government appears to have lost the sense of urgency which it displayed when people incensed by the gangrape were protesting in the streets. Its approach is marked by doublethink.

The situation calls for steps to alter the mindset which treats women as lesser citizens, but the government focuses on populist measures hoping for electoral dividends. In the wake of the gangrape, some sections had demanded that sex offenders be given capital punishment. The commission headed by former Chief Justice JS Verma, which was asked to recommend measures to ensure women’s security, did not favour it. However, the government provided for the extreme penalty through an ordinance, believing the demand has popular support.

In the budget presented to Parliament last week, Finance Minister P Chidambaram proposed the creation of a fund for women’s security and the setting up of an all-women public sector bank. He set apart Rs10 billion for each. Details are lacking because the proposals were put in at the last moment.

Some commercial banks have experimented with all-women branches but an entire bank exclusively for women is a novel idea. Criticising the proposal, Surjit Bhalla, an economist, said, “It’s the worst idea I have seen anywhere, and in any budget.” Chanda Kochhar, CEO of ICICI Bank, the country’s largest private sector bank, differed. “The proposed bank is for women,” she said. “The focus seems to be to fund women entrepreneurs and give them encouragement. And if it is an all-women bank, it’s going to be very efficient.”

Justice Verma saw the bank proposal as one of tokenism. “Such tokenism will not deliver if it is not backed by a complete change in mindset, both in government and in civil society as a whole,” he said.

The political leadership’s preoccupation with populist ideas to the exclusion of core aspects of women’s security stems from its ambivalent attitude. While committed to equality of sexes, it is weighed down by paternalistic traditions and is unable to ensure gender justice.

While making a statement in Parliament last week on the rape and murder of three minor girls in Maharashtra, Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde mentioned their names in utter disregard of the law which prohibits identification of sex crime victims. When opposition members drew attention to the impropriety, he withdrew the statement and the chairman ordered that the names be expunged from the records.

Ministers make statements in parliament on the basis of drafts prepared by senior officials. The inclusion of impermissible information in Shinde’s statement indicates lack of sensitivity and respect for legal provisions in the Home Minister’s office.

As many as 162 of the 552 members of the Lok Sabha, the lower house of parliament, had declared in affidavits filed at the time of the elections that they were facing various criminal charges. The charges against some of them included rape, molestation and other crimes against women.

Among the politicians hauled up in connection with crimes against women across the country is a former Haryana minister, Gopal Goyal Kanda, who has been charged with abetting the suicide of an airhostess.

Often powerful politicians escape prosecution. The names of two Kerala leaders, PJ Kurien, currently deputy chairman of the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of parliament, and PK Kunhalikutty, a senior minister of the state government, have come up repeatedly during the past one-and-a-half decades in cases of rape of minor girls. The investigators kept them out of the lists of accused claiming lack of evidence. However, material casting doubts on their version continue to surface from time to time. -- Gulf Today, Sharjah, March 5, 2013.

Phantoms on terror radar

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Within an hour of the two explosions that took 16 lives in Hyderabad, capital of Andhra Pradesh, on Thursday, some news channels started scrolling headlines suggesting involvement of the elusive Indian Mujahidin. But on Monday, the state was still waiting for reliable clues, for which it has announced a reward of Rs1 million.

Going by police accounts circulated by the media, in the last six years the IM has set off more than a dozen blasts in several cities including Delhi, Mumbai, Pune, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Lucknow and Varanasi — more than one in some places — killing hundreds of people.

The outfit’s name first surfaced in 2008 when two channels received emails claiming responsibility for an explosion in Jaipur. An attached video footage showed a cycle with a bag on its carrier which presumably carried explosives.

Since then investigators have treated cycle bombs and email claims as IM markers. Cycles were used in the latest Hyderabad blasts but there was no email claim.

The media has described the IM variously as a home-grown terror outfit formed by remnants of the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) and the Indian arm of Lashkar-e-Taiba of Pakistan which has links to the Inter-Services Intelligence.

In an article accessible at the website of the Combating Terrorism Center, set up at the US Military Academy at West Point after 9/11, journalist Praveen Swami, who has purveyed Indian intelligence data extensively, traces the origin of the IM to a gathering of young Muslims at Bhatkal on the Karnataka coast in 2004. He writes, “They swam, went for hikes in the woods, honed their archery skills, and occasionally engaged in target practice with an airgun.” The local police, he says, were unaware that these men were the “core team of the jihadist network that would soon be known as the Indian Mujahidin.”

According to another journalist fed by intelligence agencies, a dossier prepared by the Delhi police after last year’s Pune blasts and circulated to the states by the Centre, the IM’s genesis goes back to 2000; it is ubiquitous, with modules in states as far apart as Delhi and Kerala and Maharashtra and Bihar; its top leaders, Riyaz Bhatkal and his brother Iqbal Bhatkal, are in Pakistan and it has hideouts in Nepal and other places.

Vicky Nanjappa, a Bangalore-based blogger who tracks reports on IM activities, notes that each state police has a different version about its working. While there have been arrests galore, and after a couple of arrests the police claim to have cracked a particular case, the matter never seems to reach the logical end. “The conviction rate has been a zero,” he writes.

India banned the IM in June 2010. The US declared it a terrorist organisation the following year and said it had close ties with other terrorist entities like LeT, Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami (HUJI) and its goal was to establish a caliphate for South Asia.

While terrorism is a harsh reality, the terror hunt looks like a phantom chase. According to one report, Riyaz Bhatkal was involved in the Mumbai serial blasts of 1993 and had been on the police radar since then. According to another, the special cell of Delhi police had interrogated him after the 2010 Pune blasts and obtained from him the names of several members of IM modules. It is not clear how he got out of police custody.

At one time the investigating agencies said Riyaz Bhatkal had masterminded the blasts and Shahrukh supplied the explosives. Now they say Riyaz and Shahrukh may be different names used by the same person. Yasin Bhatkal, said to be the IM’s bomb-maker, was arrested in Kolkata in 2008 but was released a few months later as his real identity was not known.

Press Council of India chairman Markandey Katju last week accused the media of dividing the people on religious lines by demonising the Muslim community by bringing up names like Indian Mujahidin after every bomb blast. He pooh-poohed reports of IM emails saying any mischief-maker can send such messages.

B. Raman, a former head of the Research and Analysis Wing, India’s external intelligence agency, wrote on Saturday: “If there is terror, it has to be a Muslim. If he is a Muslim, he has to be from the IM. If it is the IM, it must have acted at the instance of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence. That seems to be the thinking reflex of the police and the agencies.”

Caught in another scam

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The United Progressive Alliance government is in damage control mode following revelations in an Italian court that Indians were bribed to secure orders for helicopters. It has asked the Central Bureau of Investigation to probe the charge but there is little chance of the agency coming up with any concrete evidence.

Many military contracts have been mired in scandals but now, for the first time, the name of the chief of staff of a defence force has come up in a corruption case.

It was in 2010 that India placed orders with AgustaWestland, an Anglo-Italian company, for 12 helicopters for the VVIP squadron which flies the president, the prime minister and visiting dignitaries. Early last year Italian prosecutors began an inquiry into allegations that AW’s parent company, Finmeccanica, had paid kickbacks, part of which had reached Italian politicians. The Indian contract was mentioned in this connection.

Last week Finmeccanica’s chief executive, Giuseppe Orsi, was arrested for allegedly paying $670 million to secure the Indian order. According to the prosecution, Air Chief Marshal SP Tyagi, who was Chief of Air Staff from December 2004 to March 2007, was paid an amount, which has not been quantified yet, through his relatives “to perform and for having performed a deed against his official duties.”

Both Orsi and the company have denied the bribery charge. Tyagi has admitted that he met certain middlemen involved in the deal in the company of some relatives, but asserts he took no money.

The deed Tyagi allegedly performed was modification of the specifications of the helicopter to favour AgustaWestland. He points out that the modification was done in 2003, before he became air force chief, and the contract with the firm was signed three years after his retirement.

The deal with AgustaWestland was signed after a decade-long quest for a suitable helicopter, which began when the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance was in power. Taking into account the possibility of having to fly VVIPs to high-altitude areas like the Siachen Glacier, it was proposed that the helicopter must be capable of flying at a height of 18,000 feet.

Brajesh Mishra, then National Security Adviser, suggested modification of the specification. In a letter to the then air chief he said the height specified had created a single-window situation since Eurocopter, a Franco-German enterprise, was the only one with a helicopter that can fly at 18,000 feet. He asked that the specifications be revised in consultation with the Special Protection Group, which looks after VVIP security.

The SPG proposed that the operational height be lowered to 15,000 feet. This opened the way for AgustaWestland to participate in the tender. The SPG also wanted safety to be a prime consideration. This gave AW a distinct advantage as its helicopter had three engines, not just two.

Following the NDA’s defeat in the 2004 elections, the UPA came to power and in 2005 AK Antony was appointed defence minister. Reports at that time said Congress President and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi had picked him for the post in view of his clean reputation.

Congress and BJP spokespersons are working overtime to pin responsibility for the scam on each other. The former relies on the fact that the NDA government initiated the move to modify the specification. The latter points out that the modification was approved and the contract awarded by the UPA government.

When reports of the Italian investigation appeared in the Indian media a year ago Antony asked the defence ministry to look into the matter. The Indian embassy in Rome was not able to provide any information beyond what had been published. Parliament was told an inquiry could not be undertaken merely on the basis of media reports.

Unlike in the 2G and Commonwealth Games scandals, now before the courts, the name of no politician has come up in the AW deal so far. But the BJP sees in it an opportunity to embarrass the Italian-born Congress President Sonia Gandhi. It has also called for an inquiry into the role of an aide of her son and Congress Vice-President, Rahul Gandhi.

The new scam brings to mind memories of the Bofors scandal in which the names of prime minister Rajiv Gandhi and his friends had come up. The CBI investigated it for many years without any success.-- Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 19, 2013.

Why P.J. Kurien is under a cloud

By B.R.P. Bhaskar 

IANS                                                                                                                        

With the resurfacing of the Suryanelli sex scandal case, which has rocked Kerala off and on since 1996, Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman P.J. Kurien has come under a cloud of suspicion again.

The case arose out of the abduction and serial rape of a 16-year-old schoolgirl of Suryanelli in Kerala by 42 men over 41 days in January-February 1996. One after another three police teams investigated the case and none of them named Kurien as an accused.

The government appointed a special prosecutor and set up a special court to render speedy justice. In September 2000, the fast-track sessions court sentenced 35 accused to various terms of rigorous imprisonment. One accused, Dharmarajan, an advocate, who had allegedly taken the captive girl to several places in Kerala and Tamil Nadu and presented her to others, was absconding at the time. He was arrested, tried and given a long jail term two years later.

In 2005, the high court acquitted all, including Dharmarajan, of the rape charge, holding the girl had completed 16 years, which was the age of consent, and she was not an unwilling partner. It, however, upheld Dharmarajan's conviction on a charge of sex trade and gave him a jail term of only five years.

The state's appeal against the high court verdict lay unattended in the Supreme Court for more than seven years until a women's organisation drew attention to it in the wake of the national outrage over the Delhi gang-rape.

On taking it up, the apex court expressed shock over the high court verdict, quashed it and sent the case back to it for fresh determination within six months.

All the accused in the case were traced by the investigators on the basis of information given by the girl after the abductors freed her. While the investigation was on, she saw a picture of Kurien, then a minister of state in the central government, in a newspaper and told police that he was among her tormentors. Inquiries showed that he was in Kerala for a few days and had moved about without security personnel on one day.

Kurien told the investigators he did not use the services of security personnel on that day since he had no official engagements. Witnesses cited by him said they met him at Thiruvalla and Changanacherry. That meant he could not have been at Kumali, where the girl alleged he had raped her. The investigators were satisfied with his alibi.

Since the police did not cite Kurien as an accused, the girl filed a private complaint against him in a magistrate's court. After hearing the testimony of her witnesses, the magistrate issued summons to him. He then moved the high court and, failing to get a favourable verdict, approached the Supreme Court for quashing the magistrate's order.

The apex court asked him to go to the sessions court with a prayer for discharge. The sessions court rejected the prayer. Kurien then went to the high court, which granted his prayer.

The legal path Kurien chose raises some questions. In the criminal revision petition filed in the high court, he did not cite the girl, who was the complainant, as a respondent. The high court ruled in his favour without hearing her. The only respondent in the case was the State of Kerala, which had anyway decided not to prosecute him.

The witnesses who helped Kurien to establish his alibi were not produced in the magistrate's or in the sessions court. Therefore, the complainant's counsel could not cross-examine them.

Kurien's plea for discharge came up in the high court when the main Suryanelli case was virtually lost with the acquittal of all the accused charged with rape. He relied heavily upon the high court's finding that the girl's testimony could not be trusted. With the apex court quashing that high court verdict, its decision in his case stands on questionable ground.

In his television appearances Kurien said political opponents had been raking up the Suryanelli case against him at election time. He had raised this argument in the courts too, and it had passed muster there. However, this time the matter has come up not in the context of an election but in the context of the general awakening on the issue of women's security. Also, it has been brought up by the victim, who was a minor when she was subjected to sexual assault and is fighting for justice 17 years later.

Kurien's name was cleared by investigators and prosecutors both under the Congress-led UDF government and under the CPI-M-led LDF government. However, they was no unanimity among them.

One investigator has said the team leader was keen to save Kurien and did not pursue the evidence against him. Both the girl and Dharmarajan have said police asked them not to mention his name. It has come to light that identification parades were held for the others named by the girl but not for Kurien.

The special prosecutor appointed by the CPI-M-led government wanted Kurien to be prosecuted but the Director General of Prosecution, also appointed by that government, did not. The matter was settled in Kurien's favour at a meeting presided over by Chief Minister E.K. Nayanar, which suggests the decision was essentially political.

All witnesses who reinforced Kurien's alibi except G. Sukumaran Nair, general secretary of the Nair Service Society, have gone back on their statements to police. To make things worse, Dharmarajan has told a channel he took Kurien in his car to the guest house where the girl said he assaulted her.

Their revelations having knocked the bottom out of Kurien's alibi, he is under increasing pressure to step down from the post of deputy chairman and submit to a fresh probe.

One Billion Rising: some events in India

Today is the day of One Billion Rising.

Anoushka Shankar writes:

...we will rise, dance and take a stand to end violence against women.

Below are a list of One Billion Rising events in major cities of India. If you don’t find an event in your city, you can also take action by getting more people involved in the movement. Get your friends and family to take the pledge and forward this mail to those who can attend.

Delhi: Cultural events and lighting of candles at Parliament Street from 5pm to 8 pm.

Mumbai: 5 pm to 8.30 pm at Bandra Amphitheatre - community discussions and performances along with Bollywood celebs Farhan Akhtar, Rahul Bose, Javed Akhtar and others.

Kolkata: Cultural event at Shahid Minar from 2:30pm - 4pm. Rally to College square from 4pm - 6:30 pm.

Bangalore: Painting, singing, dancing and more at Cubbon Park, Manjula Mantapa entrance (Vital Mallya Road), starting at 2:30pm.

Chennai: Rally from Marina beach, Kannagi Statue to Gandhi Statue from 10:30 am - 11:30 am; public meeting and cultural activities from 11:30 am- 2 pm. 

Hyderabad: Rally from Jalvihar near Necklace Road at 4pm. This will be followed by cultural programmes at People’s Plaza from 5.30 - 8 pm.

Lucknow: March with dupattas as message boards from Begam Hazrat Mahal park to Vidhan Sabha. 12pm - 4pm.

Cochin: Art installation by Sajitha at Durbar Hall ground. Performance by Usha Uthup and other musicians at Rajendra Maidan from 5.30 pm, Durbar Hall Ground, DH Road, Kochi.

Bhopal: Cultural performances and testimonies from women at Shah Jahani Park, 10am - 4pm. Shabana Azmi will be the chief guest and C.M. Shri Shivraj Singh Chouhan will also attend.

Shillong: Cultural evening 4pm - 6:30pm at Madan Iewrynghe.

Ahmedabad: Cultural evening with Mallika Sarabhai at Sports Ground, Gujarat Vidyapeeth. 5pm - 7pm.

Vadodra: Human chain from Fine Arts College, opposite Kamati Bagh from 5pm - 7pm.

Guwahati: Cultural events with bands, music and dance at Shradanjali Park, Zoo Road. 3pm - 6:30pm.

Mizoram: Cultural events with bands, music and dance at YMA hall, Chanmari, 11am - 2pm.

As part of One Billion Rising, on February 14th, 2013, we want one billion women and those who love them to walk out, DANCE, RISE UP, and DEMAND an end violence against women. 

Attend any of these events and ask your friends and family to join you as well. Let’s rise together - to heal and transform ourselves and transform this world.

Thanks,
Anoushka Shankar

Hanging puts the clock back

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Whichever way one looks at it, the secret hanging of Afzal Guru, the lone convict in the parliament attack case, who was under the shadow of the gallows for more than a decade, is a sad commentary on Indian democracy.

While people swayed by right-wing groups, which have been baying for blood, applauded the action, civil society activists questioned the fairness of the trial, the timing of the hanging and the message that it sends out.

The case was a sequel to the December 1999 attack on Parliament House by five gunmen, said to be Pakistanis. All of them were killed by security personnel, who lost five men in the action. Four civilians were also killed but none of about 100 parliamentarians who were in the building was hurt. A massive military build-up on both sides of the India-Pakistan border followed, raising fears of a nuclear conflict.

According to the investigators, the attack was plotted by Jaish-e-Mohammad, a Pakistan-based Kashmiri outfit, whose founder, Maulana Masood Azhar, is among the 20 persons whose names figure in dossiers New Delhi has given to Islamabad. Pakistan says the evidence India has provided is not sufficient to prosecute them.

The Bharatiya Janata Party, which habitually takes a hard line on India-Pakistan relations while in the opposition, has been particularly hawkish on the Parliament attack case. The attack had taken place when the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance was in power. Azhar was one of the hardcore militants its government had released from prison earlier to secure the safe return of the passengers of an Indian plane which was hijacked after it took off from Kathmandu.

Afzal Guru was a Kashmiri militant who had surrendered to the security forces. Later he moved from the valley to Delhi and was engaged in business there. The charge against him was that he had conspired with the attackers and helped them to get arms and shelter. He claimed he was framed.

He did not get a counsel of his choice to represent him in the trial court. All six lawyers whose names he had proposed refused his brief, some of them out of fear. He dispensed with the services of the court-appointed lawyer, saying he was not presenting his case fully.

While disposing of Afzal Guru’s appeal against his conviction, the Supreme Court conceded there was no direct evidence to show he belonged to any terrorist group or was a party to any criminal conspiracy. However, it held, circumstantial evidence unerringly pointed to his collaboration with the attackers. It said the collective conscience of the society would only be satisfied if capital punishment was awarded.

Presidents APJ Abdul Kalam and Pratibha Patil left office without taking any decision on the mercy petition filed by Afzal Guru’s wife Tabasum. Pranab Mukherjee, who took office six months ago, rejected the mercy plea on February 3 clearing the way for the hanging.

Afzal Guru is the second person to be hanged in three months, the first being Ajmal Kasab, the Pakistani gunman who was captured alive during the 2008 Mumbai terror attack. As in the case of Kasab, the execution procedures were completed in utter secrecy and the body buried in the jail compound.

Afzal Guru’s family and lawyer were not informed about the date of his execution. Kashmir was placed under curfew, cyber links were cut and secessionist leaders placed under restraint to check protests. Still there were protests, some of them violent, and the valley observed three-day mourning.

Congress party spokesman Rashid Alvi said the hanging sent a tough message to the world that India would not tolerate terrorism. He appeared to be oblivious of the negative message implied in the short-circuiting of established procedures.

Human rights groups in the country and abroad were sharp in their criticism. “The secret, shameful and surreptitious manner (of the hanging) is most unbecoming of a democracy,” said Yug Mohit Chaudhry, lawyer and campaigner against death penalty.

Many analysts saw Afzal Guru’s execution, rejecting calls for reprieve, as an attempt by the ruling Congress to take the wind out of the BJP’s sails ahead of parliament’s budget session beginning this month and the general election due next year. They noted that Kasab was hanged just before the last session.

“It’s extremely tragic if Indian democracy is going to survive on executing someone or the other before every parliament session,” said Vrinda Grover, a prominent lawyer and activist.

Clearly the hanging has put the clock back.--Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 12, 2013

Limits of sporadic protests

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

Concerned citizens who came out to protest as the government dilly-dallied on critical issues during the past two years have gone back, and the political class is back at its old game.

In the last few years, across India people have staged myriad protests against the central and state governments’ policies and failings but their voices rarely went beyond their towns and villages.

Two issues, corruption and women’s security, developed into national causes and unnerved politicians as the capital was the epicentre of protests, and the tremors they set in motion reached urban centres throughout the country.

One of them was the anti-corruption movement initiated by Anna Hazare, a social activist of Maharashtra. India Against Corruption, a civil society group led by rights activist Arvind Kejriwal, lawyer Prashant Bhushan and former police officer Kiran Bedi, mobilised support for it. Large crowds turned up at the venue of the fasts Hazare undertook on the issue in New Delhi.

The movement forced the central government to rush through the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, a bill which had been in cold storage for several decades. The bill got stalled in the Rajya Sabha, the upper house, which set up a select committee to go through it and suggest changes.

Last week the government revised the bill in the light of the select committee report. While accepting several recommendations of the committee, it has rejected the proposal to vest in the Lokpal, the proposed ombudsman, the power to transfer officials of the Central Bureau of Investigation. It has also turned down the suggestion that officials facing Lokpal probe should not be heard at the preliminary stage of inquiry.

Anna Hazare has expressed disappointment with its provisions of the bill and accused the government of going back on the commitments made to him. “This government is incapable of making good laws,” he says.

However, Kiran Bedi has welcomed the measure. Whatever its faults, with its passage, at least some anti-corruption mechanism will be in place, she points out.

Arvind Kejriwal and Prashant Bhushan recently broke away from Hazare to float a political party, arguing it is necessary to enter the electoral arena to make a difference to the situation.

Team Anna having split, the government does not see any threat of a new movement. However, in the absence of a clear majority for the ruling United Progressive Alliance in either house of Parliament, it is not possible to say if the bill will pass master and if so in what form.

Since the bill will emerge from the Rajya Sabha in a form different from what the Lok Sabha adopted it will have to go back to that house. If the Lok Sabha does not approve of the changes made by the Rajya Sabha, the two houses will have to hold a joint sitting to vote on it.

Women’s security emerged as a major issue after a 23-year-old paramedical student was gangraped and brutally assaulted in a Delhi bus on the night of December 16. She died a few days later in a hospital in Singapore, where she was sent at government expense for treatment.

Responding to waves of protest in Delhi and elsewhere demanding stern measures to check gender violence, the government appointed a three-member committee headed by JS Verma, a former chief justice of India, to recommend measures to deal with rising sexual offences.

The committee earned all-round praise by hearing the views of all sections of opinion and coming up with a comprehensive set of proposals within a month. Justice Verma asked the government to match the panel’s commitment by implementing its recommendations immediately. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh wrote back: “I assure you that we will be prompt in pursuing the recommendations of the committee.”

The government acted fast but not fairly. With no protesters in the streets to put pressure, it felt free to take liberties with the panel’s report. It ignored the suggestion to make marital rape an offence. It also overlooked the recommendation to review the provisions of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act which protect rapist soldiers.

The government sugarcoated the rejection of important recommendations by promulgating an ordinance, instead of going to parliament with a bill, and including in it a provision for the death penalty, which many groups had sought but was not favoured by the Verma panel.

The government’s response to the two agitations shows sporadic protests are not an adequate substitute for sustained civil society action.--Gulf Today, Sharjah, February 5, 2013.

Police swoop on Odisha village: crackdown on anti-Posco protesters

The following is a message received from Prashant Paikary, Spokesperson, POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti:

Dear Friends,

In the wee hours today (at around 4 am) the police has entered into our villages and beaten up women and children, arrested some of our villagers (number is yet to be known).

As we have intimated you earlier that the police force has been gradually swelling in our area amidst our continuing human chain and Dharana in the Balitikira-the boarder of Govindpur and Dhinkia villages of Jagatsingpur district, the police has deceptively entered to the villages with full force at 4 a.m. today. Our people sensed their possible move at around 2 o clock night and alerted the villagers by ringing bells. Gradually women, children, male members started getting accumulated at the Dharana place. At 4 a.m. the police entered and attacked the women and children first. The male police have ruthlessly beaten our women who were lying on a human chain. Some women have been severely inured. The Police have thrown our children like flowers, some of whom are injured. Some villagers have been arrested by the police and been taken to custody. At the moment we do not have exact numbers as the situation is too tensed on the spot. The police have started breaking our betel vines and cutting the trees forcefully. More and more numbers of our villagers have come to the spot and a war like situation has arisen. Our committed villagers are facing a mighty 12 platoons of police force.

We fail to understand the decision of the state to acquire land when the National Green Tribunal has already suspended the environment clearance to the proposed POSCO project in our area. Naveen Patnaik is behaving like an agent of the POSCO company.

As the situation is too alarming, we appeal all our friends to protest against the barbarism and call/write/fax to the Prime Minister, Chief Minister of Odisha and Chief Secretary of Odisha, Home Minsitry, Odisha appealing to immediately stop the police brutality and withdrawal of the force from our area. Please call to your respective MPs and MLAs and raise your protest against them urging them to oppose the illegal move. Write to NHRC also.

We request our media friends to rush to our villages and see the situation in their own eyes and report. 

We will intimate further developments soon.

Please widely circulate this mail.

In Solidarity,

Prashant Paikary
Spokesperson, POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti
Mobile no-09437571547
E-Mail - prashantpaikary@gmail.com

The contact address of the authorities

1. Naveen Patnaik

Chief Minister, Odisha

Tel. No.(O) 011 91 674 2531100,011 91 674 2535100,

011 91 674 2531500, Epbax 2163

Tel. No.(R) 011 91 674 2590299, 011 91 674 2591099,

011 91 674 2590844, 011 91 674 2591100,

Fax No- (91)6742535100

E Mail: cmo@ori.nic.in

2.  Muralidhar Chandrakanta Bhanadare, Governor of Odisha,  Fax No- (91)6742536582

3. Shri B K Patnaik, Chief Secretary, E-mail: csori@ori.nic.

Phone no -             0674 - 2536700      

            0674 - 2534300      

            0674 - 2322196      

Fax No - 0674 - 2536660 

3. S.K. Mallick , District  Collector, Jagatsinghpur, Contact number            09437038401      ,   Fax no - : (91)6724220299

4. Superintendent of Police, Debadutta Singh. Mobile no-09437094678,dmjsp@ori.nic.in

5. Dr Manmohan Singh, Prime Minister of India

Tel no-            +9111-23016857      

e mail: manmohan@sansad.in

6. Sonia Gandhi: Tel Phone no -             (91)11-23014161      , (91)11-23012656, Fax- (91)112301865, soniagandhi@sansad.nic.in,

7. Chairperson, National Human Rights Commission of India, Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi 110 001, Tel:             +91 11 230 74448      , Fax: +91 11 2334 0016, Email: chairnhrc@nic.in

8. Shri. V.Kishore Chandra Deo

Minister of Tribal Affairs

Ministry of Tribal Affairs,

Room No. 400  ‘B’ Wing, Shastri Bhawan,

New Delhi- 110001

vk.deo@sansad.nic.in 

9. Smt. Jayanthi Natarajan

Minister of Environment & Forests

Ministry of Environment & Forests

Paryavaran Bhawan,

CGO Complex, Lodhi Road

New Delhi-110003

mosefgoi@nic.in

Corruption in the age of globalization

B.R.P.Bhaskar

Corruption is a part of mankind’s hoary tradition. Ancient Indian works bear testimony to its existence in the distant past. Going by the Gospels, one of Christ’s disciples was an official who was corrupt. In theory, in a feudal dispensation fear of instant retribution may deter an official from accepting illegal gratification but when rulers want to amass riches for personal gratification or for financing wars they cannot act against corrupt officials who help them realize their goal. In the early phases of British rule in India, the administration was highly corrupt. Officials of the East India Company returned to England from their Indian assignment with immense wealth. Hickey, who set up India’s first newspaper, exposed corruption by Company officials but he was acting in the interests of a faction within the organization and was not a genuine anti-graft crusader. The House of Commons summoned Robert Clive and Warren Hastings, two enthusiastic empire builders, to answer charges of corruption. Under the Company’s rule there arose a class of Indians who served the cause of the colonial masters and obtained opportunities to fatten themselves at the cost of their own countrymen. Those whom the Company had employed to prepare land registers falsified the records and dispossessed people of their holdings. After the British government assumed direct responsibility for the governance of India military adventurers were replaced by officials selected through a competitive process, and they tried to provide a clean administration. 

The Indian Civil Service, which comprised educated Britons and Indians selected on the basis of a tough examination, enjoyed a high reputation for efficiency and integrity. It was, however, not entirely free from corruption. Soon after Independence, two senior Indian officers of the service, S.A. Venkataraman and S.Y. Krishnamoorthi, faced corruption charges. Under the rules, an ICS officer could only be tried by another member of the service. The British officer who tried Venkataraman was scandalized by the evidence that a contractor who had dealings with his department had picked up the bills for the Scotch whiskey which a New Delhi wine shop delivered at his house each month. Both Venkataraman and Krishnamoorthi were sentenced to jail terms. That was in the 1950s. Since then there have been few instances of officials of such seniority being prosecuted although the system continued to provide scope for corruption. Evidently, somewhere along the way it lost the ability to act against corrupt officials presumably because they were acting in concert with political elements. 

Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru established a convention of ordering a judicial inquiry when a prima facie case of corruption or other impropriety was established against a Central minister or State Chief Minister.  On the appointment of an inquiry commission the minister was obliged to resign but an adverse finding did not lead to criminal prosecution or prevent return to the government at a later stage. In other words, corruption only exacted a small political price. It did

not invite a legal penalty.

Over the years corruption charges have spiralled. In the 1970s, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi famously described corruption as a global phenomenon. It is true that corruption has existed in all societies and at all times but there is nothing to indicate that in India it was as widespread at any time as it is today. The economic liberalization programme the government initiated in the 1990s has been widely represented as one involving dismantling of the licence-permit raj, which had spawned corruption in the early years of Independence. However, the era of globalization it inaugurated has seen enormous growth in the extent and volume of corruption.

At the root of the continuous expansion of corruption is the political parties’ growing need for resources to fight elections. In a five-year period, they have to face three elections – at the national, state and local levels – and even cadre parties are becoming increasingly reliant on money for the conduct of campaigns. Acceptance of contributions from corporate entities was widely seen as undesirable as it would place the parties under obligation to them, and at a very early stage Parliament passed a law prohibiting political contributions by companies. The ill-conceived legal remedy led to widespread use of black money in elections.  Many business houses found it necessary to generate black money to fund political campaigns. The law has since been changed but black money continues to oil the election machinery of the political parties.

When the Congress dominated politics at the Central and State levels it was the major beneficiary of corporate donations. Jawaharlal Nehru is known to have stayed away from fund raising, leaving the job to party leaders who maintained close contacts with the captains of industry. As other parties grew and began posing a challenge to the Congress, businessmen started patronizing them too. Over the years the fund collectors came to have much clout within the parties and some of them started siphoning off part of the donations to build private kitties. A veteran of the freedom movement observed in the 1970s, “In our time 80 per cent of the money we collected reached the AICC, the rest going into expenses. Now only 20 per cent reaches the AICC, the rest going into other channels.”  As collections dwindled, parties in power began raising money through kickbacks. There was now a direct link between favours shown to individual business houses and the money that flowed into party coffers. Still later a similar link emerged in the award of foreign contracts too. The Bofors scandal is a case of this kind that got exposed. In many States, postings and transfers of officials also became a source of political funds. When officials are drawn into fund raising in one way or another it becomes difficult for the political masters to check corruption in the bureaucracy. That explains why the system which could throw the book at members of the ICS is unable to take on members of the less glamorous successor services.

Corruption in the bureaucracy operates differently at different levels. When officials at the higher levels take bribes it is generally to show favours. Businessmen consider the payments they make as part of their investment. Ordinary people who deal with the lower levels of the administration for routine matters often find it necessary to grease palms not to receive any favour but to get what they are entitled to as a matter of right such as a birth or death certificate or a caste or income certificate.  The licence-permit raj undoubtedly offered much scope for corruption. Rahul Bajaj, a leading industrialist, has admitted that he expanded his business surreptitiously by producing more than what he was licensed to manufacture. This is how the famed Harvard Business School, of which he is a distinguished alumnus, records the story in his own words at its website: “To lower my costs while improving the price and quality of my products, I needed economies of scale," he explains. "Ignoring a government regulation, I increased my volume by more than the permitted 25 per cent of my licensed capacity. If I had to go to jail for the excess production of a commodity that most Indians needed, I didn't mind."Bajaj’s confession about breaking the rule has special significance as he is the scion of a business family which had close connections with the nationalist movement and Mahatma Gandhi. He did not go jail for his defiance of the law, which his alma mater describes as “his own form of disobedience” in a bid to pass it off as something akin to Gandhi’s civil resistance movement. It is not unreasonable to assume that the authorities, politicians and officials, were not unaware of the goings-on in the Bajaj plant and that their acquiescence was bought in a manner which neither he nor Harvard wishes to acknowledge. In a book titled “The Polyester Prince”, published in 1998, Hamish McDonald, an Australian journalist, chronicled how Dhirubhai Ambani, a self-made businessman, built a big empire in a short period. A few copies of the book reached India soon after its publication but quickly disappeared and no further consignments reached the country. The Ambanis reportedly threatened to launch legal action if the book was sold in India. At one time the book was available online but now it is not easily traceable even in cyberspace. It is not clear if the credit for blocking it belongs to the powerful state or to the resourceful business house.  Dhirubhai Ambani’s two sons figure high up in the Forbes list of Indian billionaires, and the magazine has indicated that the older of them, Mukesh, could emerge sooner or later as the richest man in the world. The names of the Ambani brothers and their mother, Kokilaben, figure in the list of Indians who had accounts in a branch of the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation in Switzerland, which France had made available to India some time ago. The Indian government’s failure to act against the bank or the account holders suggests it is reluctant to pursue black money trails which may lead to corrupt politicians and officials.

                                                                                                                                                                  

Corruption of the permit raj days, enormous as it was, pales into insignificance in comparison with the scams of the era of globalization, the amounts involved running into hundreds of billions of rupees. There has been an exponential growth of graft since investors, domestic and foreign, started rushing to grab valuable resources such as land and minerals. Rapacious businessmen have shown readiness to bribe their way around obstacles such as environmental laws and opposition from local residents.  Many politicians have acquired business interests in diverse fields, including the media. Affidavits filed by candidates seeking re-election to public offices have revealed enormous growth in their assets during their earlier term. It was against this background that Anna Hazare launched a campaign to force the government to enact legislation for setting up a Lokpal with powers to prosecute corrupt politicians and officials. 

The idea of a Lokpal at the Centre and a Lokayukta in each State to deal with complaints against the administration was first mooted by a high-powered committee half a century ago. Several States have already created Lokayuktas, headed by retired Supreme Court judges or High Court Chief Justices. Their performance has generally fallen short of expectations of the public. In a few instances they have pursued cases against powerful persons relentlessly but the law does not invest them with sufficient powers to punish those found guilty. A Central law has not materialized so far. On several occasions bills were introduced in Parliament and allowed to lapse with the dissolution of the Lok Sabha. Finding the pending bill drafted by the government unsatisfactory, Anna Hazare and his associates, who included some lawyers and former officials, prepared a draft of their own with strong provisions and insisted that Parliament pass it into law. The government modified some provisions of its draft to meet their criticism but the bill fell through. While the government ritually reiterates it is committed to enact a strong anti-corruption law, its lackadaisical approach leaves doubts in the public mind about its earnestness in the matter.    

An act of corruption, while benefitting some, almost invariably deprives others of justice and fair play. As such, it amounts to a violation of human rights. However, the human rights movement in the country has not involved itself seriously in the fight against corruption.  Even the moral and ethical aspects of corruption have not received adequate attention. Indeed, with elements known to be corrupt parading in public as roaring successes in their fields, there is often sneaking admiration for them and willingness to emulate them.

India is currently going through a phase of fast economic growth. Even a cursory look at the history of the developed societies will show that they witnessed large-scale corruption in the early stages of explosive growth. Britain experienced such a phase in the 18^th and 19^th centuries. The United States went through a similar period in late 19^th and early 20^th centuries. Japan and South Korea, two Asian countries which saw swift development after World War II, were dogged by scams. The biggest economic success story of recent years has been China’s, and it is grappling with the problem of corruption at high levels. Where India differs from these countries is in the inability of its system to deal effectively with corruption at high levels of the administration.  Two former Prime Ministers of Japan and a former President of South Korea were jailed on corruption charges. China executed a provincial governor after being found guilty in the early days of economic liberalization. More recently it jailed two members of the powerful Politburo of the Communist Party and a third high-ranking party official is expected to go on trial soon. The real problem that India faces is not the absence of a strong law but the incapacity of the system to move against those at the top. A change in this state of affairs cannot be expected until the political machinery is cleansed and the electoral system is freed from the influence of money. (Social Science in Perspective, Vol 4, Nos. 2 and 4, July-December 2012)

Daunting poll challenge

BRP Bhaskar
Gulf Today

The Bharatiya Janata Party, which is preparing to challenge the Congress party in the 2014 parliamentary elections, has a daunting task ahead.

The BJP-led National Democratic Alliance was in power from 1999 to 2004. In Atal Behari Vajpayee it had a popular prime minister and the economy did well. Yet it could not win a second five-year term on the “India Shining” slogan. The electorate rebuffed it again in 2009.

Now it has cause for optimism. As many as 39 per cent of those who participated in a recent opinion poll said they would vote for the NDA if elections were held now. Only 22 per cent said they would vote for the UPA.

The poll also showed that Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, frontrunner in the party’s prime ministerial stakes, has a 36 per cent rating. Rahul Gandhi, whom the Congress party recently made its vice-president and is seen as its prime ministerial candidate, is way behind with only 22 per cent.

But the BJP has cause to worry too. The collapse of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s bid to secure for Nitin Gadkari a second three-year term as BJP president indicates the emergence of new dynamics in Parivar politics. This is the first time that the RSS failed to have its way in the choice of the party president.

Gadkari, a former Maharashtra minister, was little known outside the state when the RSS picked him for the top post in 2009. He became a source of acute embarrassment to the party when the media brought to light his connections with some dubious business concerns late last year, leading to an official probe. Yet the RSS pushed for his re-election. Stiff resistance by party leaders like Lal Kishen Advani and Ram Jethmalani forced it to abandon him and agree to the election of former president Rajnath Singh.

The Gadkari fiasco has come on the heels of grave corruption charges against BJP leaders in Himachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Karnataka. In last year’s assembly elections, the Congress wrested power from the BJP in Himachal Pradesh. Chhattisgarh and Karnataka go to the polls this year.

The BJP is in serious trouble in Karnataka, the only southern state where it is in power. Last year it eased out Chief Minister BS Yeddiyurappa, who had led it to victory in the state five years ago, following allegations of corruption. He has now floated a regional party, styled as Karnataka Janata Party, and is posing it a grave challenge.

The party faces dissension also in Rajasthan, another state where elections are due this year. A section of the central leadership wants to bring former chief minister Vijayaraje Scindia to the fore once again but there is strong opposition to her from within the state party.

Modi enjoys wide support among Hindutva elements, but his projection as prime ministerial candidate is sure to meet with strong opposition from sections within the BJP and the NDA in view of his alleged association with the anti-Muslim riots of 2002. The Janata Dal (United), the second largest NDA constituent, has repeatedly said that he is not acceptable.

The opinion poll also offers the BJP cause for despair. While it forecasts a rise in the NDA’s Lok Sabha strength from 159 to 203 and fall in the UPA’s from 259 to 157, the combined strength of other parties will go up from 125 to 183. It is they who will decide who should form the government.

The others are an odd assortment of small national parties with scattered pockets of influence and regional parties which are powerful in their respective areas. The leaders of some of these parties are known to have prime ministerial ambitions but the post-election scenario is likely to reduce their choice to one of going with either the Congress or the BJP. The moot question is who will be the beneficiary of their pragmatic approach. --Gulf Today, Sharjah, January 29, 2013.

Witch-hunt of human rights defender who has been exposing corruption

The following is a document circulated by the Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong:

Troubled with the tireless struggle of Ms Madhuri Krishnaswami and her Jagrit Adivasi Dalit Sangthan against corruption and exploitation of the marginalized sections in the area, the district administration has launched another attack on her.

In a later written to the Divisional Commissioner that found its way to the Chief Secretary of the state, the District Magistrate has accused Madhuri and the organization of having links with Maoists and of inciting the local people against the state. Ironically, the absurdity of the charges is exposed by the sheer fact that the police refuses to buy any such allegations and, in fact, the Inspector General of Police, Indore range, has categorically denied the presence of any Naxal activities in the area. Clearly, the District Magistrate has levelled these charges with some ulterior motives.

This is not the first time that Madhuri and the organization have been targeted by the administration. They have been facing a relentless witch-hunt ever since they took up the task of exposing massive corruption in the area run by the nexus of locally entrenched politicians with the administration.  The organization's continuous struggles against massive corruption in the implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) has drawn the wrath of such interests in particular as the organization has managed to not only expose massive corruption amounting to more than Rs 150 crores but has also got the Central government to intervene in the issue, thereby upsetting the powers that be.

The organization had also relentlessly fought against the delays in the payment of MNREGA wages and has affected the supply of poor, desperate labour to the locally powerful people. But perhaps more than all this, what troubles the administration and the vested interests the most is the sense of entitlement and right the organization has been successfully instilling in the minds of Adivasis and thus destabilizing their complete control over their lives and labour. The Adivasis in the area, unlike on the past, now make their own decisions and have the courage to refuse to get exploited.

It was in this context that the district administration served an externment notice on her in May 2012 only to hastily retreat. It, however, kept conniving to silence her voice. The organization, however, kept fighting and exposed how the Management Information System (MIS), the most important tool to ensure transparency in the implementation of the scheme, was not being updated on the website as is mandatory and this was the reason behind the Ministry of Rural Developments' decision to stop funds till at least 60 percent of the MIS is updated. The ministry had ordered a probe sending its own team and this has irked the administration and the local interests even more.

The JADS had also exposed how the administration and local interests were siphoning off funds from the MNREGA by doctoring muster rolls. They found even the dead listed, and paid, in the muster rolls. Instead of taking action on such concrete evidence put forward by the organization, the state tried to derail the struggles by holding back the expenditure accounts of previous installments and telling the activists that the work-wise expenditure accounts are not maintained by the administration and that these will have to be collected from the panchayats and other agencies.

The administration's anger against the organization resulted in open assaults on Madhuri and others. One of the most recent incidents took place in October 2012, when JADS' peaceful rally of Adivasi women was violently attacked by goons led by the local Bhartiya Janta Party MLA, followed by illegal detention of the women, and not the perpetrators, by the police. The State Human Rights Commission had taken suo moto notice of the detention.

In this context the recent attack assumes immense significance. It is not merely an attack on an individual or an organization but an example of the current regime of persecuting even democratic dissenters with fabricated charges and scuffling all voices of resistance. Unfortunately, such persecution of Human Rights Defenders, as we have seen in the case of Dr. Binayak Sen, is becoming a norm than the exception and should be culled immediately if India wants to call itself a democracy.

This case assumes further significance for the fact that the District Magistrate is acting in his official capacity of being a public servant and is trying to "frame an incorrect document with an intent to cause injury" to the Human Rights Defender in question. Section 167 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 qualifies such actions as "whoever being a public servant, and being, as such public servant, charged with the preparation or translation of any document frames or translates that document in a manner which he knows or believes to be incorrect intenting thereby to cause or knowing it to be likely that he may thereby cause injury to any person." Such an offence calls for an imprisonment, if punished for 3 years or with fine or with both.

Further, Section 193 of the Penal Code prescribes punishment of 7 years imprisonment and fine for a government servant who intentionally gives false evidence or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding. It has to be assumed that the letter allegedly written by the District Magistrate to the Chief Secretary is with an intention to charge the Human Right Defender in question on fabricated charges of anti-state activities. Section 211 mandates that whoever with the intent to cause injury to any person institutes or causes to be instituted any criminal proceeding against that person or falsely charges any person with having committed an offence, knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for such proceedings or charge against such person to be punishment that may extend to 2 years or with fine or with both.

The letter written by the District Magistrate to the Chief Secretary could be used for the initiation of a criminal case against the Human Rights Defender in question. In such a case the District Magistrate's action of writing an official letter to the Chief Secretary accusing the Human Rights Defender in question of being engaged in anti-state activities without even offering an opportunity to the accused to defend her case amounts to intentional misuse of public authority.